Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bulgaria–Mexico relations

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 Keep. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgaria–Mexico relations

Bulgaria–Mexico relations (edit | 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 . Relations are minimal at best. Just 3 state visits in 80 years of relations. Most relations are in the context of Mexico-EU relations which is notable. Level of trade is miniscule representing 0.000000009% of Mexico total trade. In other words if Bulgaria stopped trading, no one would notice. LibStar (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep This is very much becoming personal. What is your issue? That's any country's relationship is insignificant? That relations are only based on trade or trade blocks? Which Deletion policy will you be invoking this time? Aquintero (talk) 10:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ADHOM is not a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 09:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Is there anything else about actual bilateral relations? Military cooperation, significant migration? LibStar (talk) 10:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Nom fails to cite any reason (policy) as to why article should be deleted. "I don't think these countries' relationship should be considered important" is not a reason.
    YO 😜 09:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
    ]
my reason is that it fails WP:GNG as stated first up. You've failed to give any reason why notability is met. LibStar (talk) 09:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Aquintero that this appears to be a bad faith nom. The idea that these two countries' economic, diplomatic and cultural relations over 80+ years does not meet GNG is ludicrous. Did you even look for sources? Говорите ли български? [1]
YO 😜 10:24, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
accusing someone of bad faith is an
WP:ADHOM. having some relations is not the same as notable relations. What economic and cultural relations? Trade that represents 0.000000009% of Mexico's total trade. Does not look like much economic relations. LibStar (talk) 10:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails GNG; subject isn't notable. What I don't understand is why not simply revert Aquintero82's edit and return this to a redirect, then discuss? I guess if Aquintero82 wants to write worthless articles like these we have no choice but to delete and perhaps impart a lesson. It's worth pointing out there is no valid policy-based argument to keep this article. Perhaps no one is aware AfD is not a vote. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:49, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
this article doesn't need clean up because relations between countries is very limited. Instead of trying to demonstrate notable relations, I get
WP:ADHOM attacks. If that's the best then it says a lot for notability. LibStar (talk) 08:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
you have failed to address how WP:GNG is met and try to incorrectly argue inherent notability that mexico Bilateral relations get a free pass for notability. LibStar (talk) 22:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

rational consensus that we have followed that the bilateral relations of large countries are kept is an invented criterion that is pure subjective. In this case you've decided to give Bulgaria arbitrarily "large" country status purely to invent notability when in fact many cities of the world are larger in population than Bulgaria. Using this reasoning any country with a larger population than Bulgaria gets an automatic bilateral article with mexico. Therefore mexico-Nepal, mexico-somalia must be article. It's not a rational consensus but an irrational illusionary consensus. LibStar (talk) 16:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for making a genuine effort. This is much better than Carrite's lame effort. LibStar (talk) 12:42, 17 December 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bulgaria–Mexico_relations&oldid=1079662333"