Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finland–Slovenia 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 delete. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:53, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Finland–Slovenia relations

Finland–Slovenia relations (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

wp:n Habanero-tan (talk) 08:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Note: I "userfied" the article: User talk:Pzrmd/Finland–Slovenia relations (just for users wanting to keep x–y articles). Pzrmd (talk) 10:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

• Comment: The x-y articles of bilateral relations are probably suspended. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Proposed standstill agreement on Bilateral Relations articles. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 11:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

No, that's a proposed standstill and it specifically excludes AfDs already underway. Drawn Some (talk) 12:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Now the standstill is in force, however it only applies to new AfDs, this AfD will be allowed to run its course as normal. LibStar (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

For reference, the discussion was archived at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive195#Proposed_standstill_agreement_on_Bilateral_Relations_articles.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 19:02, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. No assertion of notability. Simply having an embassy in each others country is not notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 02:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. I'm not really seeing any evidence that this topic has received "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and thus we shouldn't have a stand alone article on it. I've searched and the closest thing I could find to a source that "address[es] the subject directly in detail" is a story on the Patria case, which I've added to the article. But for establishing notability, the source is close, but no cigar. Yilloslime ^T_C 04:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete I found very little coverage, there's this from 2002, and this looks a bit more promising but it's a rather weak letter of intent of cooperation rather than a true agreement. LibStar (talk) 07:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Nothing to assert the notability of the topic as stated by the article title. --BlueSquadronRaven 23:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep I've tied to improve the article a bit. The two countries have several bilateral trade agreements and a significant number of official state visits have been made. The two countries have embassies in each other. The fact that relations exist has been verified by multiple independent 3rd party sources. The Patria case is only one aspect of these relations, the notability of which has been established. This is a burgeoning relationship built on trade and similar cultural values. Keep and improve.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 04:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

similar cultural values? I don't see evidence of that in the article. trade? according to CIA World Factbook, total trade of Finland is about USD200billion, I don't see Slovenia to/from Finland as significant. LibStar (talk) 04:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The source, which is included in the article, that discussed this is here. The page says

"Looking at the map of Europe, one easily draws the conclusion that Finland and Slovenia cannot really have much in common, but actually there are several factors that they share. Both countries are geographically situated in regions where eastern and western cultural spheres meet, and both have for centuries been a part of various regional superpowers. As much as 70% of the Finnish and 57% of the Slovenian territory is covered with forests, which means that nature and its forces form an integral part of the citizens' lives and minds. Sports are a national interest and passion in both countries. Slovenia is a Catholic country but in both countries' history and cultural heritage, the Lutheran faith has had an important role. Education is highly valued and a minor language area has forced Finns and Slovenians to learn also other languages. Diligence and punctuality are shared virtues. Political relations between the two countries are excellent, which is proven by numerous visits. The foreign policy is based on the same European values and, in the internal politics, the same elements of social responsibility can be detected. In Slovenia, Finland is respected for its high level of competitiveness, IT-development, education, innovations and strong EU-policies. Slovenia has followed the Finnish example in, for example, parliament-government EU-coordination and closer cooperation between scientific research and its commercial applications and e-commerce is developed with the help of Finnish experience. The head coach of the Slovenian national ice-hockey team is a Finn. It is only the trade between the two countries that is still on a relatively modest level. In Finland, Slovenia is known to be the most advanced of the new EU Member States, but maybe someone still considers Slovenia as one of ex-Yugoslavia's crisis areas. Slovenia is definitely worth getting to know; everyone who has been here once, wants to come back and learn more!"

--Cdogsimmons (talk) 17:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

that's a primary source, if the above can be backed up with some independent sources then it becomes more credible. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

• Keep The source is fully sufficient. It is not a primary source. The primary sources are the text of the treaties and so forth. What the problem is, is that it is not an independent source. But an official source, even though not independent can =be used to show factual information. If the Finnish government describes its own actions, the description is reliable, although the interpretation may not be. Nations do not establish embassies and sign treaties carelessly or indiscriminately--they are major political activities. DGG (talk) 03:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

and should therefore be covered widely in third party sources in order to establish notability. LibStar (talk) 03:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Comment. Just a note to say that I've continued to follow the development of this article, and in my opinion none of the newly added references meet the bar of WP:N, i.e. significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Yilloslime ^T_C 03:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:NOTE, has not been subject of significant coverage in WP:RS secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 11:14, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. --AuthorityTam (talk) 18:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete Does not meet WP:N, it has some coverage, but not significant. Click23 (talk) 20:00, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete for lack of independent coverage of the relationship. Lists of agreements and visits, without any hint of contextual relevance, violate WP:NOTDIR; they don't describe a phenomenon as such. As for the Patria case, well, see Patria case for that, I guess - no need to duplicate content like this. - Biruitorul ^Talk 20:30, 23 June 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.