Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colombia–Ireland 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 keep. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Colombia–Ireland relations

Colombia–Ireland relations (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

another random combination. non resident embassies. Google news search reveals hardly anything [1] LibStar (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - agreed, lacks significant coverage and so fails WP:N. Yes, there are the Colombia 3, but if they're really notable, let's first write Colombia 3 before worrying about mentioning them anywhere else. - Biruitorul ^Talk 06:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:46, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
• Comment The majority of the Foreign country-Ireland relations articles are virtually useless and only state if there is an embassy in either country and little else plus a decorative map that add nothing to the users understanding of the topic. Perhaps all these should be merged into a table showing the countries that have embassies or consulates in Ireland and the countries where Ireland has embassies or consulates. This table should then be in the article Foreign relations of Ireland possible with redirects from the individual named articles which can of course be expanded where there is something more to be told. ww2censor (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable, not likely to be found so. --BlueSquadronRaven 15:53, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included on the  and Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bilateral relations page(s), which are related to this deletion discussion. User:Ikip
• Comment I remember hearing on radio more than once - years ago - about supposed IRA representatives coming to Columbia to train local guerilla fighters, or something like this... Vmenkov (talk) 01:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

• I once walked round the site of the Battle of Boyacá on a cool and rainy day. I recall that a lot of the names on the memorial to the British Legions had Irish names. Aymatth2 (talk) 03:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete since i find no discussions of any weight about this bilateral relationship in any reliable sources. That some alleged provos were once arrested in in colombia might belong in one of our many articles on FARC or the IRA (i bet that incident is already mentioned). Unsourced anyways.Bali ultimate (talk) 13:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

• If anyone is interested in starting an article on the relationship between Ireland and Colombia, there is a rich source of information at Society for Irish Latin American Studies - but it has little to say about formal relations between the two countries. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

• Keep: I have added some content, with sources, illustrating the relationship. Aymatth2 (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep - Per re-write by Aymatth2 a fine article that should not be deleted. -Marcusmax(speak) 23:51, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note to closing admin. there has been an attempt at canvassing for this AfD. I have warned the editor in question about this. LibStar (talk) 00:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The editor has apologised for this canvassing as it was directed to specific editors, editor has promised to send such notifications to a wider range of editors. LibStar (talk) 00:29, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The canvassing was to bring more references to the article, not more votes to this page. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

• Keep on the basis of the added sources; I do not see that the content of these articles need by about formal diplomatic relations: these articles is not "diplomatic relations between ... " -- though that was the only content added at first. (yes, I was canvassed, but it was appropriate, as I do not always say keep for these articles. And interested as I am, I can not keep up with the flood of AfDs without some help.DGG (talk) 00:27, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep There is enough information there now to warrant an article. Dream Focus 00:35, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Non notable and would be just as well served by a 200 by 200 matrix for bilateral relations. And suggest that canvassing of a substantial number of ARS members may have muddied this review. Collect (talk) 00:36, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep As the article currently exists, it's clear that the articles from reliable and verifiable sources establish notability. This should be the norm, allowing an opportunity for articles like these to be expanded, rather than a string of drive by AfDs. Alansohn (talk) 00:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Rename. The material included is notable, but not for the formal relations between Ireland and Columbia. So I suggest we rename the article as Irish involvement in Columbia, as the relationship seems one-sided, and we can avoid deleting this interesting and notable material. Fences and windows (talk) 00:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

• I am a bit schizophrenic on this. To me, "relations" are formal diplomatic meetings, treaties, investments, trade deals and so on - direct ties or dealings between the countries. A "relationship" is a more complex and subtle subject, involving migrations, perceptions, emotions and informal ties. I have tried to salvage other articles like this, just listing the diplomatic / trade relations, and got criticism that they did not discuss the relationship. This one is mostly about the relationship, and as you point out says little about the formal relations. I am inclined to leave the title and expand the article to cover the other aspects, which should be easy enough to source - the meetings and treaties get press coverage. Usually, relations and relationships are connected. But yes, they are not the same at all. An article on USA/Cuba relations from 1970 to 2000 would have very little in it, while an article on the relationship in this period could be huge. An article on USA/Nepal relations could record many meeting and agreements, while there would be very little to say about the relationship. On renaming this one, my vote is "dunno". Aymatth2 (talk) 01:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

• Keep Meets requirements of notability and verifiability. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Comment regarding the expanded version: a) Ireland didn't become independent until 1922; surely the actions of Irishmen in Colombia can be mentioned elsewhere; b) to the extent the Legion's activities in Colombia are notable, can Legion of Mary not absorb the details; c) like I said at the start, I'm not sure how notable the Colombia 3 are, but again, surely there's room to mention them in one of the many articles at Category:Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Other than that, once we strip these away, not much remains to be said. - Biruitorul ^Talk 02:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

  Yes, its is a basic math principle that if you remove all the information in an article there is nothing left. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 07:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

• Note to closing administrator this article has increased in size three times since the AFD nomination,[2] including 8 new references (where there were none before. Ikip (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Strong keep editor made a lot of efforts to make this article notable, adding a lot of reliable sources. I am adding some of the 4,460 google news references when searching for Colombia Ireland "foreign relations". Ikip (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Strong keep per fine improvements by Aymatth2 and others. FeydHuxtable (talk) 06:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Wikipedia is supposed to be international. Colombia-Ireland relations may not be important for someone living in the US, it could be important for someone living in Colombia or Ireland. They may want to know whether the countries have diplomatic relations, what tariffs exist, what products are exported, toursim, visa requirements, common membership in international organizations, reciprocity for recognition of professional and academic qualifications, and any joint organizations for relations between the two countries. Irish emigrants have made a contribution to all former colonial countries and Colombia exports to the entire world. The Four Deuces (talk) 11:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• Comment using the above basis, any bilateral relationship with trade is therefore notable for an article. All countries trade to some extent (even North Korea). Notability of bilateral relations is not always the case as shown in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colombia–Hungary relations , Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malta–New Zealand relations, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colombia–Cyprus relations and at least 70 other of these that have been deleted. LibStar (talk) 12:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

• The mass of stubs created by Groubani generally had no useful content, and have rightly been nominated for deletion. Some were expanded during AfD and kept, others were not, perhaps could not be expanded and were deleted. A bi-lateral relationship is only notable if the article has significant content backed up by reliable independent sources. My guess is that some of the articles that were deleted could have been expanded, maybe will be recreated some day, but with many there really is no significant or notable relations or relationship. This one caught my attention because I once visited the site of the Battle of Boyacá, extremely important in the history of Colombia, and noticed the monument to the British Legions. An unexpected bit of Irish involvement that I knew nothing about. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:02, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

yes many of the stubs were not notable. but I would say that admins generally err on the side of caution and won't delete unless there is clear consensus. some of those I have nominated have ended up "no consensus". Of course, anyone is welcome to recreate articles if they have notable content. LibStar (talk) 13:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

• Comment The material added by Aymatth2 is interesting, but covers only the actions of Irish people working independently of the Irish government (at least, I hope the IRA works independently of the Irish government!) and not of a relationship between the two countries themselves. The actions of Irish volunteers in Colombia's war of independence probably merits its won article, but not under the title of Colombia–Ireland relations; it simply doesn't apply. I'm afraid my earlier delete !vote stands. --BlueSquadronRaven 15:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
• NEW EVENTS HAVE MADE THESE AFDs IRRELEVANT We could really use some help with Foreign relations of Argentina by country, the first of many comprimise merges. Eventually these articles will be merged into the "diplomacy of..." articles.
  PLEASE HELP US Lets all work together to merge these articles instead of arguing about them. So much energy has been wasted in these arguments, which could be used on merging these stub articles onto one page. I strongly encourage the nominator to withdraw the AFD nomination. Thanks. Ikip (talk) 16:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it is better to have a general discussion of how these topics should be treated than to have ad hoc discussions on each article. The Four Deuces (talk) 18:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

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.