Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embassy of Denmark, Ottawa
- 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 merge to Canada–Denmark relations. Liz Read! Talk! 04:10, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Embassy of Denmark, Ottawa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article merely confirms it exists. No third party sources to meet GNG. LibStar (talk) 04:20, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations, Denmark, and Canada. LibStar (talk) 04:20, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Merge into Canada–Denmark relations. This is clearly an improper SPINOUT, not mentioned at the parent other than "see also". The reverse embassy is mentioned at length. Why wasn't an ATD proposed?! gidonb (talk) 15:04, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Merge with Canada–Denmark relations, per Gidonb. Svampesky (talk) 19:30, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Shouldn't an embassy with multiple consulates be kept? Machinehert (talk) 21:35, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Based on what??? Embassies are central institutions in bilateral relationship so the first thing we should look at with embassies are the bilateral relationship articles. Are the embassies covered there, to what extent, is a SPINOFF justified? Bilateral relationship articles often are short, making the SPINOFFs usually unjustified. Prodding is never an option, deleting is rarely an option. An AfD for an embassy without ATDs at the very least debated (usually these should be suggested) is sloppy. gidonb (talk) 01:26, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- ok, I kinda see what u mean. So it should just be copy and pasted into that bilateral relationship page. Machinehert (talk) 08:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Based on what??? Embassies are central institutions in bilateral relationship so the first thing we should look at with embassies are the bilateral relationship articles. Are the embassies covered there, to what extent, is a SPINOFF justified? Bilateral relationship articles often are short, making the SPINOFFs usually unjustified. Prodding is never an option, deleting is rarely an option. An AfD for an embassy without ATDs at the very least debated (usually these should be suggested) is sloppy. gidonb (talk) 01:26, 18 August 2024 (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.