Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serbia–Tunisia relations


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Delete -- does not meet WP:RS standards. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Serbia–Tunisia relations

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

whilst noting the 2 countries have embassies, distinct lack of coverage of actual bilateral relations, most coverage is sport. first article is some business delegation visit but hardly enough to warrant an article. Also note that Serbian Foreign Ministry states very little on relationship including no bilateral agreements whatsoever. Much the same in a French search, did find 1 tourism protocol which isn't a formal agreement. LibStar (talk) 03:06, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. No secondary sources.  Non-notable.  Renee (talk) 03:17, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No secondary sources discuss these relations. Fails WP:GNG. Johnuniq (talk) 11:41, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 13:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yet another pairing of random countries that doesn't show any notability. Nothing here beyond pedestrian governmental functions. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —Cdogsimmons (talk) 16:07, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep -- this is one of a large series of artciles on international relations. Since neither country speaks English, the lack of English language sources is hardly surprising.  The two countries will not have embassies to do nothing.  Accordingly, there must be content out there somewhere.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, embassys do things. They host dinners, lobby for things, provide travel visas and help citizens of their own country. Where is the notability in that? Niteshift36 (talk) 04:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to answer that, to make sure that we all understand the notability policy, it would be in significant 3rd party coverage of such activities.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 19:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, significant 3rd party coverage of those things might do it....and that is what we seem to be lacking, isn't it? Niteshift36 (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * we don't keep articles because they might have sources. I should add that the Serbian foreign ministry website is also fully on English and says close to nothing about this relationship. I also did a search in French which is still used by a lot ot Tunisians. LibStar (talk) 23:55, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Really?. I'm stunned this needed to go to AfD but since we're here 'Delete - I'm open to Heyman keep but It needs to be soon. -- Banj e  b oi   13:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No independent secondary sources = non-notable = delete. QED. Yilloslime T C  17:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.