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 all, with the exception of Ambassador of Iceland to Azerbaijan, which wasn't AfD tagged and will need to be dealt with separately - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambassador of Iceland to Azerbaijan. Michig (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ambassador of Iceland to Sri Lanka[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Not sure why someone has decided to make another sprawling series of ambassador articles, this time for non resident ambassadors who in some instances are located thousands of km away. Also nominating, (there are about 100 but nominating these first)

Deletion sorting
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iceland-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:33, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Andorra-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Armenia-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbijan-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bahamas-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Barbados-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:34, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply] Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 15:35, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. If we keep one of these, we have to keep all 65536 possible articles about ambassadors from one country to another (since someone will cite whatever we keep as a precedent) , and 65536 articles that are each a few names and a slight description seems like a waste. In the best interest of Wikipedia, ~Ngeaup (talk) 21:36, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. There is no notability with any of these ambassadors. Tavix | Talk 00:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Is this a binary all or nothing? I am looking at Ambassador of Iceland to Australia and it is a standard list of the previous and current ambassadors of Iceland to Australia with the dates that they served. We already have articles on most of the ambassadors in Icelandic and some in English, so why is a list with their dates of service not a reasonable list? It appears to be a standard almanac entry. Almanacs are only useful if they are complete.

they are all non resident ambassadors, they may have visited Australia once to present their credentials, but there is no coverage of actual work done as a non resident ambassador of Australia. LibStar (talk) 07:24, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

the current non resident ambassador to Australia, is the same as the non resident ambassador to Croatia! Which might show how relevant this post is. LibStar (talk) 07:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

even better the current non resident ambassador to australia is based in Germany!! That might show how notable the ambassador posting in Australia is. I wonder if he has actually visited Australia? LibStar (talk) 07:37, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, it's not an all or nothing thing, but there has to be a standard between notable and non-notable ambassadorial relationships. For me, I believe that litmus test is whether or not there is an embassy (and I'm sure there are exceptions). If a country x has an embassy in country y, there should be significant (and thus notable) relations. None of these fit that description, which makes them non-notable. Tavix | Talk 15:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - we're not even talking about potentially-notable X-X relations articles - there are offices, titles and plaques on walls. The relations between countries here are, really, irrelevant - we would need significant coverage in multiple reliable sources for the office itself. St★lwart¹¹¹ 03:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

given that what I've nominated is non resident ambassadors, in almost all cases, there is zero coverage. LibStar (talk) 03:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all - Per nominator and other supporters. Jackninja5 (talk) 11:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.