From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
Awarded for consistently and continuously nominating the cruft de la cruft of bilateral relations articles to AfD. BlueSquadronRaven 18:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your tireless research in finding "Xcountry- Ycountry relations" that simply don't merit inclusion and for putting up with all the opposition you've had to endure. Some editors actually appreciate your efforts. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
For your commitment to ensuring that articles of dubious notability are defended with actual sources and not flimsy puffery. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For working tirelessly to prevent Wikipedia from being turned into some sort of United Nations Yellow Pages.
Keep up the great work! Stalwart111 00:30, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Thanks for doing your part at AfD! Keep up the great work! МандичкаYO 😜 07:45, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Examples of freaky deleted articles

  • The Davidson West and Nobert Streets Roundabout with such exciting text as "hitting the back of preceding car because it was yielding to opposing-direction traffic, when turning (from Davidson West towards East, turning on Nobert towards North);Sports-model car hitting the concrete in the middle of the roundabout - cause unknown, no injuries".
  • France-Nauru relations
  • Nauru–Spain relations
  • Eswatini–Spain relations
  • Lesotho–Spain relations
  • Bhutan-Turkey relations
  • Turkey–Vanuatu relations
  • Kiribati–Turkey relations
  • Turkey–Tuvalu relations
  • Palau–Turkey relations
  • Croatia–Turkmenistan relations

Totally unnotable statements

  • Her mother Mrs. Wilson works in a small school named Parramatta North Public School.
  • The site of Country X's former Embassy in Reykjavik, lies farther north than the French Embassy.
  • Politician X has 2 cats.
  • has two Bassett Hounds that he enjoys taking for long walks. They are called Enrique and Patricia. He hopes to add to his canine family a third hound, which he wants to name Matt Bianco
  • Non-Acting Career - During high school Jennyfer worked part time at the $2 Shop
  • Principal Mr Peter Yii has made a rule that all students must wear the uniforms of their uniformed body on Wednesdays
  • The Under-18 being the senior team uses the school's red jersey where as the Under-15 team uses the school's green jersey.
  • The training session will took place every Saturday at 10.30AM till 12.30PM at school gym (ground floor, behind school hall).
  • In 1953, the front fence of the school was replaced with a pipe-rail and cyclone wire
  • Bus route numbers and destination information are displayed on the front of the buses. In addition, route numbers are also displayed on the side and back on most of the buses.
  • Unlike many other shopping complexes in Johor Bahru which charges exorbitant parking fees, Tebrau City charges only RM 1.00 per entry and for Jusco AEON members, it is free of charge for the first 2 hours.
  • It is considered shameful to cheat on fares.
  • Car boot Sale Every Sunday morning at the car park area, car boot sale is held together with Sunday morning markets. Many items were on sale including clothing, garden items, art, shoes and collectibles.
  • Şahin goes to Turkey every summer for his holidays.
  • She is very active in sport and get the title of "sportswoman" for 5 years in primary& secondary school year 1997, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2002.
  • The city is a very hot one, making it appropriate for tanning sessions at the beach.
  • city's international airport is totally air-conditioned
  • It is not weird to say that the students already cultured with university-style of learning.
  • In 2009, the school have produce it own thumb drive called i-Mozac (not to be confused with Apple's products). The lamp in the school is fully use LED which assembled by the students own
  • in a university article Laundry rooms equipped with washing machines and coin-operated tumble dryers are located in each student accommodation.
  • There are 7 classes total from form 1 to form 5 which is "L", "U", "C", "E, "A", "T" and "V" derived from "LUX LUCEAT VOBIS".
    "L", "U", "C", "E" classes for form 4 and 5 are science stream classes whereas the "A", "T" and "V" classes are arts stream classes.
  • As of 20 June 2013, Makati has outlawed the use and disbursement of plastic bags, Styrofoam food containers and plastic cups in shopping centers.
  • in a university article, if there ever was a case of blatant self promotion Ms. Person X, BS Social Work cum laude of batch 2009 took the first place in the June 2009 Social Workers' Licensure Examination with an average of 86.00%
  • town X has " a few cafes, hairdressers, a large car park, a public toilet block"
  • in a school article In 2006, air-conditioner units were installed in the Staff Room and a PA system was set up around the school. The old toilet next to the Quartermaster Room was renovated into the current PBSM Room, sometimes used also by the dental checkup team from outside the school. The Science Labs were renovated from wooden tables to concrete tables.
  • and for a barrel scrape for adding info to an article Direct Flights from abroad arrive at regional International Airport in 216 km away.
  • in a university article gate 4 − serves as car entrance from 6:00 am–8:00 am. And Around the rotunda are concrete benches frequented by the students. On both sides of the rotunda are parking lots also for students AND All vehicles must enter this gate from 6:30 am-8:30 am since Gate 2 is reserved for cars exiting the campus at these times.
  • The school's prefects wear yellow top with dark blue bottoms, and dark blue jackets
  • in a city article some of the bars where people can drink beer and grab some french fries
  • in a university article The residential area within the university's premises is where the faculty and students can live
  • Mrs. Flack was the teacher for P3-5 but was made redundant
  • in an airport article There is a currency exchange area located in the front lobby, although the exchange rates are slightly higher than in the city. A coffee shop is located upstairs on the left side, as you enter the front lobby.
  • in a city article.With this ramps, vehicles traveling from KESAS wishing to make a right turn to Kewajipan would have to continue their journey on KESAS and make U-turn at the ramp and return to make a left turn into USJ. The 4 phase traffic lights at the junction have since been adjusted to 2 phase.
  • in a city article Public toilets in Anderson are situated at the bus interchange
  • in an airport article The terminal facilities include toilets.
  • in an airport article A new drainage system was built with the road, which prevents flooding during rainy seasons.
  • From 2015-2016, Shirts and Ties will be mandatory for all students.
  • in an international airport article mobile phone coverage is available at the airport.

Completely false statements

  • Spanish is widely spoken in Iceland.
  • The new hospital will have 200 doctors (when it will only have 180 beds)
  • Malaysia is the closest ally of the United Kingdom

Complete rubbish

  • The school can't avoid from having stereotypes for its existence as an popular school. The students usually will get teased by their school acronym (KTK) as KaTaK (frog in Malay). Them also being negatively judged as arrogant.

Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions

Besides what's stated in Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, here's a few more extremely weak and lazy arguments I've encountered:

  • Keep It's had a Wikipedia article since 2008. Why be so quick to delete? Hard drives filling up? Keep, no reason to delete. Be an "Inclusionist" not a "Deletionist"!
completely lazy vote that makes zero effort to demonstrate how any notability guideline is met.
  • Keep excellent article/almanac entry
shame, as the article would have clearly failed good article criteria
  • Keep I would be devastated if this article was deleted.
yes someone did say this, unfortunately the article in question did get it deleted. sorry
  • In a Keep argument, Country X (in the south of the Southern Hemisphere) and Country Y (in the North of the northern hemisphere) are both influenced by the Atlantic Ocean, therefore they have bilateral relations.
  • Keep article is currently unsourced and therefore has significant room for improvement, so we need to keep it.
that's right the lack of references is a reason for keeping the article and of course, this editor didn't bother to do a google search to see if anything existed to prove notability
  • The reason why this organization is not in google news or spread in secondary sources is due to the reason it is quite new and was registered recently.
Article creator trying to explain in an AfD why the only mention of his organisation in Google search was the Wikipedia article. In fact, he gave one of the best reasons I've seen for delete
  • Keep Country X is obviously doing the best they can for Country Y. Therefore notable relations.
and the editor didn't provide a shred of evidence to back this vague argument.
  • Keep - notable. To prove notability, X is negotiating to have a feature article in Australia's most widely distributed community newspaper.
that's right, asking a local newspaper to publish an article on X in the hope to advance notability for a Wikipedia article.
  • Dear administrators, please do not delete my article. The article seems unambiguous and advertising, because the company has not been active since the year of its foundation (2005). It has started to function only a few months ago, and due to this we do not have third parties' sources, articles, etc.
Article creator trying to explain in an AfD why "my" article should be kept.
  • Keep - WP:CREATIVE and WP:BIO are merely guidelines. we don't have to follow them and this person is notable.
the user tried to argue keep, despite the complete lack of third party sources. but that's right, just ignore established guidelines like WP:CREATIVE, WP:BIO, WP:N, WP:GNG and call something notable even though it satisfies no guideline.
  • Keep one clear source is good enough.
that's right we can now create any article in WP with one source, despite WP:GNG clearly stating significant coverage. what's worse is that an admin (who seems to always vote keep) came up with this lame argument without any evidence of significant coverage.
  • Keep even though there is a lack of sources, we should WP:AGF and assume sources exist.
WP:AGF does not apply to assuming sources when none can be found. this is a very lame argument for keeping.
  • Keep Nonprofit organizations aren't going to get a lot of press coverage, obviously. This organization seems notable based on its approach to health care, that making it unique/notable.
so because it "seems notable" it is notable? and we relax rules for non profit organisation despite many non profit organisations such as Red Cross, Amnesty International, UNDP, are very notable in their own right.
  • Keep The fact that it was founded by a blind man makes it highly notable.

That's right, invent criterion for WP:N to suit your case.

  • Mega-Strong Save! All sources are reliable and credible and you can all go get fucked.

That's right, even though the article in question had no third party sources, telling people to get... is the best way to save.

  • Keep Due to the growing importance of bilateral relations in our increasingly multi-polar world its probably worthwhile to relax the GNG slightly in favour of useful articles such as this one.

That's right, we relax GNG because of your personal preference to keep.

  • Do Not Delete This piece is relevant. Mark my (uncoolcentral) words. Delete now and you'll regret it later.
making threats always helps your cause
  • Keep It seems notable, just unsourced.
that's right no sources is ok for a Wikipedia article. and seems notable is not the same as being notable.
  • Keep Notable enough that I went to WP to gain more information on her death.
because it has a Wikipedia article it is therefore notable? circular logic if I ever heard it.
  • Keep This article appears to have a lot of contributors, which shows that a lot is known about him other than from knowing him personally.
that's right invent a criterion of mulitple editors working on the same article, when little sources can be found.
  • Keep per admin X.
the only problem was admin X merely relisted the discussion and expressed no opinion for keep or delete. This kind of voting shows how lame some of these blind keep voters are. They don't even bother to read the AfD, let alone the article or do any search for sources, just turn up to the AfD pick a random person to vote keep per whatever.
  • Keep per editor's X reasoning.
the only problem was editor X listed the article for deletion! This kind of voting shows how lame some of these blind keep voters are. They don't even bother to read the AfD. What's better is that this vote was the same person who provided previous question keep per vote.
  • Keep. This article will help for educational purposes in the future. I believe that, although this article is a stub, it is quite important. Being a stub, however, can prove one's editing skills. If an editor on Wikipedia knows information on this article and has references to support their information, have a go now!
note how this argument contains absolutely no reasoning how any notability guideline is met. and of course they can't even be bothered to search for sources. lazy !voting indeed.
  • Keep I don't see this list as really necessary but can be improved with sourcing.

so don't see it as really necessary is actually a reason for delete! It was a list of almost all red entries with one source.!

  • keep I couldn't find sources in my country but perhaps someone else could search for sources? They would be easily found.

That's right, expect someone else to find the sources for you that would be easily found. This person's internet doesn't go beyond their national boundaries.

  • Weak Keep The article seems to be written with good intentions.. But the references makes it hard to pass notability criteria

Excellent reasoning for deletion

  • argument for keep in a bilateral AfD: There are 156.6 million people in Bangladesh — it is an encyclopedic topic. Yep Bangladesh gets automatic notability for any bilateral combination due to its population size. Bangladesh-Paraguay perhaps? Bangladesh-Nauru?
  • keep "the first mall with an underground parking area" in the Philippines' 6th largest city.

wow what a criterion

  • Shopping centres don't get much in terms of sources so it's a case of make the best of what we have.

an attempt to lower the bar of notability just so an article can pass

  • keep It is a tourist attraction, which pretty much makes it notable (there has to exist coverage about it, and readers want to find out about it). (We need a wp:TOURISTATTRACTION, currently a redlink).

That's right just invent your own notability criterion to suit your keep vote. Who cares if it's a red link

Well, FYI, I subsequently wrote the essay at wp:TOURISTATTRACTION which is doing quite well, thank you very much. :) --Doncram (talk) 06:41, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
  • keep a lack of gnews coverage is not an indicator of lack of notability .
  • keep . I am not really happy about trying to actually find usable sources .

the onus is on keep voters to find sources. This is how AfD works.

  • keep evil in various other ways to delete the articles.

Pretty much sums up why this editor never votes delete... because it's evil!

  • keep from the very little information looks like this subject might indeed be notable, but there simply isn't enough sources to back up the claim and support his notability as of right now.

compelling argument for delete if I ever saw one

  • keep argument in bilateral Umm, mathematically, if there are 100 or whatever number of Turkish immigrants in Iceland, however small the percent is, it is automatically an order of magnitude more than a similar number of Icelanders (unlikely) in Turkey, given the disparity of population
  • excuse given by keep voter for not providing sources I have stopped providing examples as it puts both unreasonable and unfair burden on keep sayers based on their honest analysis of data available to everyone.
obviously too lazy/can't be bothered providing sources
  • Keep This article is not written very comprehensively. In its current state, it looks like a delete. However, looks can be deceiving.
  • Keep Simply put, the GNG does not provide grounds for deletion.
oh really?

Trying to save articles from deletion

Whilst the addition of well sourced notable information is always welcome, I have seen time and time again, scraping the bottom of the barrel from a google search to try to insert little factoids that have countries X and Y in the text. Examples include:

  • for an X-Y article, a university in country Z did a study comparing the social security systems of countries X, Y and W. What this proves about bilateral relations is zilch.
  • But one of the better barrel scrapes I've seen is In 2008, country X qualified for the Olympics in women's field hockey when it defeated country Y. What this proves about bilateral relations is zilch. (In any case, this should be on relevant sporting team articles)
  • "Country X won the World Cup in men's golf in Y."
  • "Country X and Country Y have 2 of the highest suicide rates in OECD". What does this prove about relations and interactions between these 2 countries?
  • "President Bush visited country X and Y in the same visit." What does this prove about relations and interactions between these 2 countries?
  • In 2004, a medical student from Country X was stabbed to death in a racist attack in the southern Country Y city.
  • "In December of 2000 a court in country X temporarily blocked bank accounts of the company from Country Y over a billing dispute." Western countries do this all the time with companies from rogue and corrupt states.
  • "Country X and Y cooperate at the UN having voted together on an issue on country Z." the reference actually said 44 countries voted together. there was no evidence of these 2 countries actually talking to each other.
  • Country X and Y have had their flags flying next to each other at base of country Z in Antarctica. Yes country Z had about 20 flags flying and is what nothing to do with X and Y talking to each other.
  • In a bilateral article for country X and Y. there are 5 restaurants with cuisine from country Y, in capital city of country X. in the same article, there are 11 students learning language (from Country X) in Country Y. barrel scraping at its best!
  • for an embassy article, referring to an event before the building became an embassy "On May 8, 1963 a sonic boom caused by a Royal Canadian Air Force plane caused minor damage to the structure." Yep really adds to notability!
  • in a bilateral article X and Y have the two highest suicide rates out of the thirty members of the OECD, according to a 2007 report by that organisation'

Apparently some people still think ambassadors are inherently notable?

and people also think "ambassador to" and consulate articles are inherently notable

Great irony

It was pointed out to a user that they were WP:BLUDGEON in a deletion discussion, and this was their response:

The short version of what is wrong with BLUDGEON is, that since consensus is not a vote, and depends on the quality of arguments, we cannot put an arbitrary word limit on discussions, as opposed to forbidding mere repetition, because it would make it impossible to assess consensus, because there is a finite limit to the level of conciseness with which some arguments can be presented. Such a limit would altogether prevent some valid arguments from being moved by anyone, unless the number of participants was huge. BLUDGEON is only an essay and it happens to be incompatible with policy. None of your criticisms of me is accurate an I could throw some of them straight back at you. You, for example, engage in an excessive amount of mere repetition, saying things you have already said once over and over and over again, in a way that contributes nothing to this discussion, seemingly in a bid to shout the other side down. If that isn't BLUDGEON, nothing is. Your answer to this post is sure to repeat your "long winded" remark, for the millionth time, with no new meaningful arguments, something of which I am growing extremely tired and should not have to read. I've also been on Wikipedia several years now and encountered hundreds of editors. So what? How is that relevant? No one with a normal attention span would be tired of my comments, and they are no longer than is absolutely necessary. Even BLUDGEON, in all its extremism, doesn't argue that we have to agree with other people's opinions. I'm not trying to get snow keeps, merely to answer novel arguments/ideas that have not previously been discussed, having not appeared in earlier !votes, and need to be discussed

Notes on bilateral agreements

It has come up many a time in bilateral AfDs on the legality of bilateral agreements. many agreements are not legally binding and therefore not as strong as a treaty in adding to bilateral relations. Even weaker are "memos of understanding" and "protocols"

from p.8 of [1]

Two specific terms related to the concept of customary international law require further attention. The first one is ‘soft law’. This term does not have a fixed legal meaning, but it usually refers to any international instrument other than a treaty containing principles, norms, standards or other statements of expected behaviour. Often, the term soft law is used as having the same meaning as a non-legally binding instrument, but this is not correct. An agreement is legally binding or is not-legally binding. A treaty that is legally binding can be considered as hard law; however, a non-legally binding instrument does not necessarily constitute soft law. The consequences of such a non-legally binding instrument are not clear. Sometimes it is said that they contain political or moral obligations, but this is not the same as soft law. Non-legally binding agreements emerge when States agree on a specific issue, but they do not, or do not yet, wish to bind themselves legally; nevertheless they wish to adopt certain non-binding rules and principles before they become law.

Misconceptions of google news

Apparently a minority of editors think gnews is an inadequate means to find sources. In the majority of cases, it is definitely a means of finding reliable sources in established news sources. Google News can help assess whether something is newsworthy.

Here are some common misconceptions:

The best misconception is people who criticise me but fail to find reliable sources themselves.

My views on single purpose editors

In all my years on WP, I've encountered many single purpose editors, almost all seem to have a vested interest with the article subject indicating a strong conflict of interest.


  • <ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |date= |accessdate=2022-05-15 |quote= |publisher= }}</ref>
  • <ref>{{cite book |author= |title= |year= |publisher= |page= |quote= | url= |isbn= }}</ref>
  • <ref>{{cite news |author= |agency= |title= |url= |quote= |newspaper=[[New York Times]] |date= |access-date=2022-05-15 }}</ref>
  • <ref>{{cite encyclopedia |author= |encyclopedia = |title= |year= |publisher= |page= |quote= | url= |isbn= }}</ref>