Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Chile–Estonia relations

Moved from Articles for deletion/Chile–Estonia relations

 * Come now, Yilloslime, I've already mentioned things like a joint postal issue--items such as these are these are of interest in exploring bilateral relations. You are claiming not notable by your assertion. To Russavia: why did you even bother doing the dog-work to create all the relations categories if when there are items of interest in a bilateral relationship you'll nominate articles for deletion. Or is it because you're not liking Digwuren these days? I'll spare the diffs, I have more pressing life matters. Based on all the good work you've done on Wikipedia, is this not a waste of your constructive energies? PetersV     TALK 17:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In order to assess the notability of joint postal issues, it's helpful to know which other postal issues have been done. According to, Estonia had previously done joint postal issues with Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden, Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan.  It's not something done more often than changing socks. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 06:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Joint-postal issues are trivial. Substantial relations include such things as military ties, high-level political ties, substantial trade ties, established cultural ties, transport links, economic links, educational ties, historical links, and the like. Even then, that is not a total indication. Iraq-Israel relations would be notable, even there are no actual bilateral relations between the two, but there is a long history of hostile relations. As to the rest of your diatribe, I'll just point out that I haven't nominated this for deletion, and that I don't voice my opinions in AfD based upon any outside disputes or the like, but rather on policy, and on policy alone. --Russavia Dialogue 17:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * See, there you go trivializing. A joint postal issue with a neighbor (say Finland) would be trivial, a joint postal issue with a country about as far away on the globe as you can get from Estonia and Finland is another. There are all sorts of interesting things out there, for example, regarding the International Society for Folk Narrative Research, the elected president is Estonian--Ülo Valk (University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia), and vice presidents include someone from Chile--Manuel Dannemann (University of Chile, Santiago, Chile) representing Latin America.
 * You claim policy and policy alone. That's fine, but as you're not a particular fan of the Baltics, one strains a bit to believe you just happened by. I personally think it's in poor taste to nominate anything for deletion except the truly trivial or intentionally stupid, and that far too much effort is wasted on who believes what is truly "notable." It's notable to Baltic editors here, that should be good enough. Granting a bit more leeway might garner a more positive image among editors interested in the Baltics. Up to you of course. PetersV     TALK 22:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So basically, what you are saying is that ALL editors should ignore policy because this is the Baltics? Your claim that this article is important to the Baltics is basically straight out of Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Look at it this way, if it is important, WP:PROVEIT by demonstrating notability by the use of sources which describe non-trivial relations between the two countries. It's that simple. And yes, a Joint issue is trivial - it belongs on there definitely, but it can't be used to denote notability of a bilateral relationship. Australia-US relations do not attain notability because of a 1988 joint stamp issue; they have notability because there are military ties, trade ties, transport links, historical links, etc, etc. and this is documented in non-trivial fashion by independent sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russavia (talk • contribs)
 * User:Russavia, you're trying to make this AFD into a WP:BATTLEfield. Cease immediately. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 08:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)