- 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. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
- Latvia–Malaysia relations ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
fails WP:GNG. 8 of the 10 sources are primary. Neither country has ambassadors, nor significant trade, nor have there been any state visits ever. I searched Latvia's largest newspaper and all it had was small mentions or covering the MH370 disaster. [1]. LibStar ( talk) 07:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete The coverage depicted is routine; the subject isn't generally notable. These few sentences would better belong at Foreign relations of Latvia and Foreign relations of Malaysia before being spun out when there's something passing WP:SIGCOV. Chris Troutman ( talk) 08:02, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep bilateral relations between internationally recognized countries are inherently notable. CJK09 ( talk) 03:17, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- there is no inherent notability of bilateral articles. in fact 100s have been deleted. LibStar ( talk) 06:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. Just the fact that two countries are internationally recognized doesn't mean that their bilateral relations are inherently notable. Nothing in this article suggests that relations with Latvia are particularly significant to Malaysia or that relations with Malaysia are particularly significant to Latvia. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:48, 27 August 2017 (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.
- 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. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 02:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
- Latvia–Malaysia relations ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
fails WP:GNG. 8 of the 10 sources are primary. Neither country has ambassadors, nor significant trade, nor have there been any state visits ever. I searched Latvia's largest newspaper and all it had was small mentions or covering the MH370 disaster. [1]. LibStar ( talk) 07:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 07:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete The coverage depicted is routine; the subject isn't generally notable. These few sentences would better belong at Foreign relations of Latvia and Foreign relations of Malaysia before being spun out when there's something passing WP:SIGCOV. Chris Troutman ( talk) 08:02, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep bilateral relations between internationally recognized countries are inherently notable. CJK09 ( talk) 03:17, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- there is no inherent notability of bilateral articles. in fact 100s have been deleted. LibStar ( talk) 06:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. Just the fact that two countries are internationally recognized doesn't mean that their bilateral relations are inherently notable. Nothing in this article suggests that relations with Latvia are particularly significant to Malaysia or that relations with Malaysia are particularly significant to Latvia. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:48, 27 August 2017 (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.