- 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. Sarah-Jane ( talk) 11:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
- Latvia–Uruguay 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 . this was previously deleted and I don't see any real improvement in the article. there is no evidence of agreements, significant trade, or any high level visits. LibStar ( talk) 01:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per G4 - there's just no significant history between these countries beyond the most superficial. Latvia doesn't even have an ambassador to Uruguay, and Uruguay does not have a dedicated ambassador to Latvia. > €500,000 in annual trade in 2014. —Мандичка YO 😜 03:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep seems like there have been some diplomatic relations between the two countries and enough news reports (albeit of minimal substance), to pass WP:GNG.-- Prisencolin ( talk) 16:10, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- News reports of minimal substance do not meet GNG. These countries have next to zero relations/history/trade. —Мандичка YO 😜 04:47, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Uruguay-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. North America 1000 16:22, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines. No significant relations beyond both countries being on the same planet and agreeing to say 'hi' now and then. Nothing there for an article. Jbh Talk 18:19, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete to break the tie. Article contains no references to substantial coverage in reliable sources. Sandstein 22:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Insufficient coverage. What little there is is best covered in other foreign policy articles about these two countries. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 07:29, 29 November 2015 (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. Sarah-Jane ( talk) 11:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
- Latvia–Uruguay 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 . this was previously deleted and I don't see any real improvement in the article. there is no evidence of agreements, significant trade, or any high level visits. LibStar ( talk) 01:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per G4 - there's just no significant history between these countries beyond the most superficial. Latvia doesn't even have an ambassador to Uruguay, and Uruguay does not have a dedicated ambassador to Latvia. > €500,000 in annual trade in 2014. —Мандичка YO 😜 03:14, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep seems like there have been some diplomatic relations between the two countries and enough news reports (albeit of minimal substance), to pass WP:GNG.-- Prisencolin ( talk) 16:10, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- News reports of minimal substance do not meet GNG. These countries have next to zero relations/history/trade. —Мандичка YO 😜 04:47, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latvia-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Uruguay-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 16:18, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. North America 1000 16:22, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines. No significant relations beyond both countries being on the same planet and agreeing to say 'hi' now and then. Nothing there for an article. Jbh Talk 18:19, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 06:45, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 06:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete to break the tie. Article contains no references to substantial coverage in reliable sources. Sandstein 22:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Insufficient coverage. What little there is is best covered in other foreign policy articles about these two countries. Vanamonde93 ( talk) 07:29, 29 November 2015 (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.