Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/France–Nauru 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. Fritzpoll (talk) 10:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

=[[France–Nauru relations]]=

:{{la|France–Nauru relations}} ([{{fullurl:France–Nauru relations|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/France–Nauru relations}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Non-notable "relationship" and a stub with dim prospects for expansion into anything approaching a useful article rather than a needless content fork. The fact that a leader of Nauru once visited france can be covered, if it's deemed sufficiently notable, in the Foreign relations of Nauru article. Bali ultimate (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

:Delete. Yet another foreign-relations permastub with no prospect for expansion. Any facts can be folded in the appropriate France and Nauru articles without loss of information. There does not appear to be a compelling reason to keep this article around, especially since the relationship itself does not appear to be notable as defined by WP:N. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

::I'm glad you feel that these facts are so valuable they should be reproduced in two separate locations, where they will presumably take on lives of their own. Of course your vote is not compatible with this happening. Hilary T (talk) 16:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

:::Huh? My vote is about deleting the article itself. The information may (or may not) be germaine to other articles. Deletion votes are not about eliminating information from Wikipedia; rather it is about the existance of a specific article. The article should definately go; the few facts that it mentions may or may not be appropriate to be noted in other articles around Wikipedia, but that is not for this debate to decide. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:36, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete as original prodder. The article does not assert notability and cannot be expanded to notable form. Tavix |  Talk  16:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. -- I'mperator 16:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete A relationship that is not notable on its own. The relationships with UK, Germany, Japan and Australia might be worth an article (all of them either invaded the island or influenced it in a notable way) --Enric Naval (talk) 17:26, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete since I don't see this stub going anywhere. The two references given are in no way independent discussions of the topic. WP:N is not satisfied, and what is there to merge, besides the bare fact that diplomatic relations exist? Drmies (talk) 17:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Well they existed, but then they didn't exist. And now they do again. Hilary T (talk) 17:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Thanks, that helps. Drmies (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Does not assert notability and it does not seem to have a possibility of to expanding either. - Fastily (talk) 17:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete no assertion of notability and the article does not appear to have any chance of expanding. As noted above any pertinent information can be incorporated into the Foreign relations of Nauru article. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Does not assert notability, no chance of expanding, etc., etc., etc. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook 22:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep this one, on the basis of the quarrel with France over nuclear testing, which can be greatly expanded. Nauru is of course in the area where the testing was taking place, Many of these articles are being created a little careless of the need for content. I hope people are not !voting on them without considiring on their own account the possibilities of expansion. Eric, you mention possibilities, but France is just as important to this particular nation. Ogashiwa, Y. S. (1991). Microstates and nuclear issues: Regional cooperation in the Pacific. [Suva, Fiji]: University of the South Pacific, Institute of Pacific Studies, [http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1973/jul/02/french-nuclear-tests]. [http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0E11F7345F127A93C4A9178DD85F458785F9] ,[http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60D11F83D5E127A93C4AB1782D85F458785F9] (and about 5 or 6 more NYTimes articles). also [http://www.spc.int/mrd/asides/canberra.htm],[http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/304523351.xml?dids=304523351:304523351&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Mar+11%2C+2003&author=&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&desc=Bernard+Dowiyogo%2C+57%3B+Six-Time+President+of+Troubled+Island+Nation&pqatl=google], etc etc,DGG (talk) 00:14, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment I don't see how those references are of much use to expanding the article. The first is a parliamentary transcript which mentions Nauru in passing, the second is a story about a regional conference, the third appears to be about the South Pacific Forum (which France isn't a member of), the fourth is the text of the treaty which established the South Pacific Commission, and the final one is a tiny obituary of Nauru's longest-running president president which has no material on this topic other than "his criticism of France". That's not really the kind of coverage needed to meet WP:N. Nick-D (talk) 03:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak keep This is a topic which sounds ridiculous and its hard to see how the article can be expanded much, but New Caledonia and French Polynesia are part of France and France and Nauru have some interactions as a result of their participation in various South Pacific organisations. The French nuclear tests were nowhere near Nauru BTW - they took place at Moruroa, which is over 5,000 kilometers away (it's a bit like saying that the bombing of London took place near New York). Nick-D (talk) 03:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable bilateral pairing; the nuclear bit can easily be mentioned at France and weapons of mass destruction and Foreign relations of Nauru. - Biruitorul Talk 15:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Not notable in any way, shape or form. --BlueSquadronRaven 16:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - "minimal" contacts but the leader of Nauru had a state visit to France; some good cites exist, but not a lot, to document the topic. Bearian (talk) 18:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete not enough info or notability here to warrant a separate article; would recommend merging the nuclear protest part into Foreign relations of Nauru or some other appropriate article. tempodivalse [☎] 15:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete does Sarkozy even know that Nauru exists? LibStar (talk) 02:44, 16 April 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.