Talk:Cyprus–Malta relations

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 June 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Cyprus Mid‑importance

	Cyprus portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cyprus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cyprus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyprusWikipedia:WikiProject CyprusTemplate:WikiProject CyprusCypriot articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Malta Mid‑importance

	Malta portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Confused by statments[edit]

Delete lots of coverage in multilateral and EU context (since both were new entrants to EU) but a real lack of coverage in bilateral sense. [1]. LibStar (talk) 14:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"rv disruptive redirect. 2 Mediterranean nations with significant interaction" 05:53, 23 August 2009 [2]

Please explain, have you found more sources since 2 June 2009?

Remember, the WP:BURDEN is on those who want to keep an article, as was said in several of your AFDs, "the burden of proving notability rests with those who support the article, not with those who contest it." Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahamas–Russia relations Ikip (talk) 06:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sure my views may have changed, but the AfD has no consensus to redirect. so you need to get consensus to it especially since it went through AfD. If you continue to redirect against results of AfDs, this may need to be reported. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting does not need AFD approval. BTW. Editors regularly redirect a page hours ofter the AFD closes. Please stop calling my redirects disruptive, especially since many of the redirects have no sources, and you provide none when you revert them.

Remember WP:BURDEN, since you want to keep this article, it is your responsibility to find sources. As you have said numerous times, focus on the edits, not the editor, when I call your AFDs "disruptive" you consider that a personal attack. Seems like a double standard.

Also please notify editors when you put these articles up for deletion, it is not required, but it is courteous. Ikip (talk) 06:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you should gain consensus for redirecting articles that have gone through AfDs, AfDs can result in a redirect consensus but you haven't got consensus for it here...it's a bit like saying a deleted article should have been redirect. also do not use article talk pages for making comments directly at me, if you wish to have personal discussion, you should let me post on your talk page otherwise I will ignore such comments in future. LibStar (talk) 06:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

discussion for merge/redirect[edit]

Opening discussion for merge/redirect. LibStar (talk) 06:18, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]