Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kosovan–Maltese relations

Kosovan–Maltese relations

Kosovan–Maltese relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Since there are no reliable sources that discuss this relationship in any depth that would allow for the construction of a proper encyclopedia article beyond this stub. The only thing that can be said (and is) is that Malta recognized kosovo's independence. Well, i have no opposition to a redirect to International recognition of Kosovo once this is deleted, but will note that this is a highly implausible search term. Attempts at redirecting on its own have been reverted. Bali ultimate (talk) 17:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Non-notable other than recognition. After Kosovo builds up significant relations with such important allies as Malta and Tuvalu and those relations receive sufficient in-depth coverage in reliable sources, these articles can be undeleted. Drawn Some (talk) 17:33, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. JulieSpaulding (talk) 17:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Lots of nations have recognized lots of other nations. That doesn't make for notable relations between any of them. No coverage of the topic as a whole. Simply non-notable. --BlueSquadronRaven 17:43, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep It's notable. --Turkish Flame ^☎ 18:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:JUSTAVOTE with no demonstration of how the article meets WP:N. LibStar (talk) 14:28, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Articles which say "X-Y relations are relations between X and Y" are a teeny bit suspect as to actual content, no? Collect (talk) 18:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per Collect. Never before have I ever seen a WP article that was a circular definition and nothing else. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 21:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; no evidence that WP:N is met Nick-D (talk) 05:55, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep, I agree with being so short. But it doesn't mean it can't be improved. --♪♫Berkay^0652|message 10:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Its length is completely irrelevant.Bali ultimate (talk) 12:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to note some canvassing going on by turkish flame (yes the "message" is neutral, the audience all have voted keep on these sorts of afd's in the past). [1] [2] [3] [4].Bali ultimate (talk) 12:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete no demonstration of notable relations. LibStar (talk) 14:28, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Pavel Vozenilek (talk) 15:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep I think this article should stay and contribute, and I am completely against deletion.--Liridon 20:13, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep --Sintonak.X (talk) 22:35, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Could you demonstrate notability with reliable sources (multiple ones preferably) that discuss this relationship in any depth?Bali ultimate (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per Nom. Keep voters haven't provided any rational for why it should be kept. Yilloslime ^T_C 22:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator and precedent.--Avala (talk) 17:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Yet another X-Y relations page. Angria77 ^{Banter, Edits} 17:36, 26 May 2009 (UTC)