Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Somalia–Spain 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 keep due to expansion of the article with relevant sources during the AfD discussion. RL0919 (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Somalia–Spain relations
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Neither of them have an embassy for each other, yet they have enough relations for a separate article? Philosophy2 (talk) 04:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:19, 12 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  05:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC) Relisting comment: Third relist, because the article has been significantly expanded with the addition of threefold new sources beginning on 19:13, 23 December 2021 (UTC). Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 18:42, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Somalia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:11, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:11, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:52, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete article almost entirely sourced from Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Fails WP:GNG for lack of third party sources. LibStar (talk) 03:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, third-party sources on top of the already very valid Spanish governmental sources exist. Spain has been involved in anti-piracy and training missions in Somalia for a very long time. Per WP:THREE: Spanish Minister of Defense visiting Spanish troops in Somalia, Spain aid to Somalia from a Somalian newspaper , Spain contributing to Somalia debt relief . GNG met. Pilaz (talk) 15:27, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sorry but none of those sources discusses Somalia-Spain relations directly or in detail. Yilloslime (talk) 16:14, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes they do. I'd be curious to know what you mean by "directly or in detail". Just as a reminder, WP:GNG is clear in stating that Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. Coverage of relations from different angles (security, debt agreement, aid), on aggregate, helps this article meet the GNG. Pilaz (talk) 17:20, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * You don't need to remind me what WP:GNG right after I just quoted it: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail. Reasonable people can have a reasonable disagreement about what direct, detailed coverage of a topic means--that's why we have deletions discussions and rather than just allow admins to delete whatever they want. I don't think those citations cover the topic directly and in detail, but clearly you do. Yilloslime (talk) 20:26, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That's fair. Just as a note, the article has been significantly updated since your original !vote. It's still unclear to me why you think Somalia-Spain relations are not discussed "directly or in detail" by the sources I provided or the ones present in the article, but you're free to leave me with the impression that your !vote is a WP:IDONTLIKEIT/WP:VAGUEWAVE if you wish. Pilaz (talk) 21:19, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep I have voted to delete a lot of these inconsequential bi lateral relationship articles, *however* this one has valid content and discussion of note, and I think adds worth to wikipedia. RS seems ok. Deathlibrarian (talk) 08:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:HEY. While I appreciate the work of LibStar, in this case their deletion rationale no longer applies. Geschichte (talk) 09:32, 31 December 2021 (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.