Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montserrat–United Kingdom relations

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 no consensus‎. Owen× 00:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Montserrat–United Kingdom relations

Montserrat–United Kingdom 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)

Despite the title the article is primarily about the representative office of Montserrat in London. Lacking secondary sources to demonstrate notability per

WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 10:25, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

At the back of my mind, a history section could be easily constructed from existing content at Montserrat. From a Geography class case study in my school days, I remember the UK government's donations to Montserrat following its volcanic eruption received quite some coverage. Also, this (non-independent) webpage from the UK Government can point to other important events or episodes worth mentioning.
Nonetheless, three concerns prevent me from !voting Keep:
  1. Firstly, would any such article simply be a
    WP:COATRACK
    ? We would need to find some reliable, independent sources that discuss the topic qua topic, rather than a miscellany of "here's how the UK and Montserrat interact with each other".
  2. Secondly, I notice other BOTs don't seem to have a "BOT–United Kingdom relations" article (cf. , closed as Delete in March 2015).
  3. Finally, I'm not convinced this is the best article title for the topic. It suggests that Montserrat is a sovereign state, rather than a self-governing territory, and that feels odd to me. And while I'd happily support a redirect or merge as a
    WP:ATD
    , I can't find any appropriate target.
So, my instinct is that there is a notable topic here, but the current article doesn't do it justice, and I don't think the article title does either. I'm not sure if the topic merits a standalone article, and there's no obvious alternative to deletion. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him☎️) 16:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:58, 5 May 2024 (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.