Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austria–Georgia relations

Austria–Georgia relations

Austria–Georgia relations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

another random combination noting that Austria does not have any resident embassy. There have been no visits from Austrian leaders or ministers to Georgia and most of the bilateral treaties are minor in nature. [1]. Most searches reveal relations in a multilateral context especially Georgia-EU English search German search LibStar (talk) 06:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• Weak keep since it does contain some information (date of diplomatic relations being established etc.) – you could also add in the fact that they are European partners. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 11:03, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

  do you have any reliable sources to prove bilateral relations. my searches in 2 languages could not find anything, simply establishing diplomatic relations is not enough for an article. LibStar (talk) 11:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

  I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave here, plus the fact that I only gave a weak keep :) ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 11:07, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

  Saying "weak keep" means "should be deleted but I like it" as far as I'm concerned. If you're not sure if something should be kept or not, state your concern and perhaps others will address it. This is a discussion, not a voting booth. Drawn Some (talk) 11:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

  Saying "weak keep" means "should be deleted but I like it" as far as I'm concerned. OK, as you wish, but it's common terminology, and I thought I made my points clear. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 11:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Lack of in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources of this topic to achieve notability. For the record, government websites of an embassy are NOT independent for this topic. If the newspapers and television people can't be bothered to cover it, and no one writes books about it, etc., it isn't notable and we don't synthesize some lame stub out of primary materials just to get rid of a red link on a template. All of this is shameful the way it wastes time and puts editors in opposition over a contentless stub. Drawn Some (talk) 11:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete One more un-notable combination and permutation. Mentally append my comment on recipes. Collect (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete The only useful content ever likely in this article are the links Foreign relations of Austria (which does not mention Georgia!) and Foreign relations of Georgia (which mentions only some trivial information about Austria, implying that there is nothing notable to say). Fails Bilateral relations. Johnuniq (talk) 12:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• Strong keep - not sure about contemporary relations (but I suspect that for Georgia Austria is one of the most important foreign partners these days), but historically Austria-Hungary and its ambassador Georg von Franckenstein were instrumental in the formation of the first, shortlived Democratic Republic of Georgia, together with the German and the Ottoman empire. For literature on these relations, see this book [2] Stepopen (talk) 21:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

This article is about relations between Austria and Georgia, not Austria-Hungary and the Caucasian nations. A related but entirely different subject. Basically most of the nations discussed in that book do not even exist today.Drawn Some (talk) 22:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Looking at some other articles on bilateral relations, the standard seems to be that these articles cover the complete history even if technically the countries do not exist anymore. See for example Germany–Russia relations which also deals with the relations between the German and Russian Empire or West Germany and the Soviet Union, countries that technically do not exist anymore but have clearly defined successors. Same applies for Austria as the successor of the Austrian-Hungarian empire and Georgia as the successor of the Democratic Republic of Georgia. Stepopen (talk) 23:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

• Delete No third-party coverage of the topic in relation to any other relationship. --BlueSquadronRaven 23:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (country)-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 04:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 04:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
• Delete not sufficiently notable. Recreate later if notability can be demonstrated. Hobartimus (talk) 15:26, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

• Keep According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia,[3] Austria and Georgia have the following bilateral agreements:

Agreement between Georgia and the Republic of Austria on Bilateral Foreign Economic Relations

Memorandum of Understanding between the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia and the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic Austria

Air Transport Agreement between the Austrian Federal Government and the Government of Georgia

Agreement between the Government of Georgia and the Government of the Republic of Austria for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments

Agreement between the Government of Georgia and the Government of the Republic of Austria for Avoidance of Double Taxation

Protocol on the Amendment to the Air Transport Agreement the Austrian Federal Government and the Government of Georgia

I think we can all agree that bilateral relations presently between Austria and Georgia exist. Important/notable? Perhaps in the eye of the beholder. Obviously there is room for growth, which is likely since Austria supports Georgia's integration into the European and Euro-Atlantic structures.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2009 (UTC)