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. Yunshui ^雲_水 09:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fundamental Statute of the Kingdom of Albania[edit]

Fundamental Statute of the Kingdom of Albania (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

A historical national constitution. Probably technically notable if one could find the relevant monographs on 1930s Albanian constitutional law, but the article doesn't actually say anything other than that it was established and then replaced, which is already covered (with more information) in the articles about the respective kingdoms. Sandstein 13:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albania-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Contains a link to the actual constitution, which can not be found elsewhere.—azuki (talk · contribs · email) 11:54, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• That link could be added elsewhere, e.g. in History of Albania. Wikipedia's purpose is not to be a directory of external links. Sandstein 13:59, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. While Zog's kingdom did not last, notability is not temporary. The 1928-1939 constitution clealrly passes GNG and is covered in current sources showing a lasting impact, e.g. [1], or this scholar search. Note for beforing - Zog, 1928, and constitution are better keywords than the article title.Icewhiz (talk) 18:26, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - plenty of sourcing (both given and elsewhere, even under its technical name, and they are less good) e.g. 1 e.g. 2. Constitutions are generally felt to be reasonable content forks as well. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:36, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - The constitution probably meets notability requirements and as noted the fact that it did not last does not of necessity diminish its importance. However the article could certainly do with expanding by someone who knows more about this particularly to include material that explains the importance/notability of the constitution. Dunarc (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. That the article is a stub is not a reason to delete. Srnec (talk) 02:53, 30 July 2018 (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.