Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahamas–Kosovo relations

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 Kosovo. Viable AtD. While there is no strong desire to merge, there's no clear reason to delete prior to redirecting. History is under the redirect if someone finds sourced content worth merging. Star Mississippi 02:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bahamas–Kosovo relations

Bahamas–Kosovo relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Similar AfD to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kosovo–Myanmar relations. These articles are replicating content in International recognition of Kosovo. Also nominating:

• Bhutan–Kosovo relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Botswana–Kosovo relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Chile–Kosovo relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Eritrea–Kosovo relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Kosovo–North Korea relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) LibStar (talk) 22:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Kosovo, and Caribbean. Shellwood (talk) 22:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Africa, Asia, Korea, and Chile. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all Articles can always be recreated if and when there's something substantial and notable to cover other than non-recognition. RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 05:17, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Just because they're replicating content of another article, doesn't mean they aren't worthy of a standalone article. These have merit and are sufficiently notable. --Bedivere (talk) 01:11, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  How are they sufficiently notable? Each article is not subject to significant coverage. LibStar (talk) 01:22, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  But there's nothing to cover apart from some blow-by-blow of the continued non-recognition! RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 05:20, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Bedivere; most of these are sufficiently notable and the replication of content is not a good enough reason to delete them. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 16:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Each articles fails GNG. LibStar (talk) 00:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per lack of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Not seeing any in depth coverage for any of these pairings. Yilloslime (talk) 20:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• delete all Once one gets past the first sentence of each, the rest is blow-by-blow WP:NOTNEWSpaper reporting, which may or may not justify the thesis of each article. Besides, it's hardly notable whether Bhutan recognizes any place it doesn't directly abut, and the recognition of the rest is hardly notable either. Perhaps as entries in the list they are justifiable (although I'm having a hard time believing its contents, if the supporting citations all look like these), but there's certainly no reason for individual articles. Mangoe (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per Mangoe. Highway 89 (talk) 15:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/redirect all When something doesn't exist it generally doesn't need an article. The main recognition article says it all. Reywas92^Talk 21:38, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:51, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/Redirect to International recognition of Kosovo as an WP:ATD. Kosovo is only a partially-recognized state, so other states' recognition is different from other relations articles. However, that is better covered in the main page as opposed to separate pages, since most diplomatic relations except for regional neighbours are solely hinged on recognition.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 04:31, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bahamas-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Congratulations! This is the first article in a new delsort! –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:55, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, unless we can find a reliable source that significantly covers the topic of the "Bahamas–Kosovo relations" (or others'). Sporadic mentions of political statements is not reliable coverage. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all. Countries should have relations before we write about their relations. If there's any info that's not duplicated in International recognition of Kosovo, then it can be merged into that article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.