Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/South Ossetia–United States relations (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Missvain (talk) 23:41, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

South Ossetia–United States relations
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article is a recreation of the previously deleted page. See Articles for deletion/South Ossetia–United States relations. There are no relations between the United States and breakaway South Ossetia. The title tries to prove something that the body of the article denies. In fact, the whole text is just a collection of quotes of the US officials who criticize those who have relations with South Ossetia. Nonrecognition is extensively discussed in the International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia entry. Hence, the article possesses no encyclopedic value. KoberTalk 14:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect to International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia : There is no need for an article because there are no relations between the 2. However there is more information at International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, so a redirect would be appropriate. ColinBear (talk) 14:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep This article isn't a recreation. It looks like that simply because I changed the original redirect to the international relations of Abkhazia and South Ossetia article to my draft version which I decided to no longer wait on the review process before I added this version to the original redirect. The original article that was created had no sources or any real encyclopedic value. Here is the first published version. Clearly, it's quite different from what I've added. The fifth paragraph about the Congressional ban on U.S. aid to Abkhazia and South Ossetia is significant in regards to the relations between the U.S. and South Ossetia and in part, Georgia. "The title tries to prove something that the body of the article denies." Then that would have to include North Korea–United States relations, Armenia–Turkey relations, Armenia–Azerbaijan relations, Bhutan–United States relations. The first three have tense relations and no formal relations, but enough notability exists in keeping these articles. Bhutan and the U.S. don't have formal relations and yet the two countries get along quite well. There are also articles about Israel's relations with Arab and Muslim majority states that don't recognize it (Algeria, Tunisia, Afghanistan to name a few). And yet there is still plenty of value in having those articles. This argument is contrary to argue for deletion. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:48, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:24, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia  as per above. Two states don't need to have friendly relations for there to be an article about it, but one state must recognize that the other even exists. The entire article is just about the US declining to recognize South Ossetia / Abkhazia, and that facet is already well covered at the redirect target. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 00:48, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect to International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, clearly. An article about something which doesn't exist. Hmmm.  Onel 5969  TT me 03:05, 7 May 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.