Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greek-Kenyan 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 no consensus. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:11, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greek-Kenyan relations

another random combination. Greek foreign ministry notes no one higher that a foreign minister has visited. The 'economic and trade' description is incredibly vague with no actual numbers for trade. [1] There was some incident in 1999 and another "cooperation' agreement reported in the media but not much else. LibStar (talk) 14:11, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No special significance here at all. Collect (talk) 15:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The incident involving Abdullah Öcalan and the Greek ambassador to Kenya George Costoulas has been well covered by the press. Greece and Kenya also have a number of bilateral treaties, one dating back almost 100 years, not to mention the multilateral relations.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 19:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can't that be covered in Abdullah Öcalan LibStar (talk) 07:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rule that information has to exist in only one place in Wikipedia. That is why we have the Main template. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article lists various unrelated facts (but Wikipedia is not a directory). Reference to the Ocalan affair sounds interesting, but investigation shows that the issue was about Greek–Turkish relations (someone wanted by Turkey was harbored by a Greek diplomat in Kenya). There is no indication of notability in this article. In case readers wonder how I came to that opinion, the answer is simple: my opinion (and yours) does not matter. The disparate facts are not notable until a reliable source says they are. Johnuniq (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep They have signed some bilateral treaties, they are members of the World Trade Organization, and Greece has an embassy in Kenya. It's notable. --Turkish Flame ^☎ 14:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

simply being members of the World Trade Organization is not evidence of actual bilateral relations. precedents have shown having an embassy is not necessarily evidence of notable relations, can you provide any evidence of significent coverage? LibStar (talk) 15:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and reference better, the relationship is verifiable and meets the Wikipedia standard or notability. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per User:Cdogsimmons. Exceeds WP:Notability. T L Miles (talk) 21:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A couple of treaties and belonging to the same club doesn't make the relationship notable. Treaties exist between countries about all sorts of things. That's the normal course of govt. business. That is pedestrian, not notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete since there is no in depth coverage of the topic of this article, anywhere.Bali ultimate (talk) 23:18, 10 June 2009 (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.