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. with no discrimination against a merge/redirect discussion on its talk page. J04n(talk page) 19:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Australian Ambassadors to Algeria[edit]

List of Australian Ambassadors to Algeria (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)

fails WP:GNG. none of the sources establish that the list or indeed the role of ambassador is notable. The sources merely confirm someone held the role, and most of them relate to the non resident ambassador in Paris. LibStar (talk) 23:53, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Clearly surpasses notability guidelines. The Drover's Wife (talk) 01:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

please explain how. as admin @Coffee: notes your arguments for keep are vague and without evidence. LibStar (talk) 02:31, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and redirect- There is no such thing as inherent notability and the sources do not come anywhere near establishing it for this article. Furthermore, there are something like 200 independent nations on Earth so are we going to have 40,000 of these cookie-cutter articles for every possible combination? All that would be required is a note at Australian Ambassador to France (which probably is a notable topic) that they're the same person. Reyk _YO! 07:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a bit of an aside, if we can have an article for an asteroid which will never grow, why cannot we have an article for every country's diplomatic postings. At 40,000 there will be less than the eventual number of asteroid articles / minor planets and other unremarkable astronomical bodies, already about 500 list articles, and infinitely more useful. Aoziwe (talk) 15:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the scope of this role is international and it has received significant independent coverage, in the form of announcement of appointments in The Canberra Times. Given that the article is a 'list of Ambassadors to Algeria' of course the sources confirm who held the role. Further, notability is not temporary and the more recent sources are about the ambassador to Algeria (who is also resident ambassador to France, etc.). Clare. (talk) 09:03, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent sources mention Algeria very briefly. Notability is not temporary is irrelevant. I'd argue this list was never notable. LibStar (talk) 09:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and merge info. As per the AFD discussion on the Australian Ambassadors to Kazakhstan page, this info could easily be placed on the List of Australian Ambassadors to France page, which will strengthen that page and not lose anything worth saying about this subject, of which there appears to be little.Siegfried Nugent (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This has now been done.Siegfried Nugent (talk) 06:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as there's nothing particularly outstanding how and why this can be its own article, it can simply be mentioned at the other article. SwisterTwister talk 04:14, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep (Declaration - I am Australian - but have no specific interest in this - I was random patrolling old open AFDs) The article's content has the same intrinsic notability, as many others, including for example List of Australian ambassadors to France, and cannot be sensibly merged to that article because (as far as I can tell) the diplomatic posts have not always overlapped. It looks like someone has already started this good faith but I suggest too soon merge ? @Siegfried Nugent: Where has the Cairo period gone in the merge ? If merged it should go into the Egypt list but then there is no way of finding all the diplomatic postings to Algeria ? Aoziwe (talk) 15:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how 'intrinsic notability' is a policy-minded reason for keeping. Nor is the absence of a single period held by Cairo a reason for keeping (i have now added it to the French Embassy page). And the notability of this post, now closed, is clearly not on the same level as other postings. Simply put, a 24 year old posting with little independent coverage is not notable enough to warrant a page when the information can be put and linked elswhere.Siegfried Nugent (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2016 (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.