Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Countries bordering the Arab League

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. NW (Talk) 14:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Countries bordering the Arab League

Countries bordering the Arab League (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

This unsourced list is a non-encyclopedic cross-categorization of countries. There is no significance to this particular list of countries, nor are there any sources which discuss this group of countries based on the fact that they border Arab countries. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. SnottyWong ^confer 05:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

• Delete Somewhat interesting and even important, but as the nominator said not an encyclopedic topic. Borock (talk) 10:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:INDISCRIMINATE. --Nat Miller (talk) 11:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Delete - I can't see how a list of countries bordering a group of countries is article-worthy. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 12:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

To be fair it is clear that it is implied that they are on the "front line" against Muslim expansion. Still OR however, for the purpose of WP. (Note that I am assuming good faith and taking your "I can't see..." as literal.)Borock (talk) 12:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

• Delete If it had context showing that there's concern in these nations about a repeat the "Moors and Tours" era, I could see some merit (although I don't think that one could find it even if it was looked for). This one is more of an excuse for "flags and tags", more of an geographic exercise than anything. Mandsford 16:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• keep, i can see that alot of people are against this article, which i find as very suitable for anyone wanting to know the cuontries that border the arab league, which would make them understand the conflict, and ties between these states, and the Arab League as an organization, especially since the Arab league has recently adopted a policy to create a forum between it (the Arab League) and its bordering states... but if it is decided to be deleted, i think merging it into the georgraphy of the Arab League page would seem more appropriate.... wouldnt you think?

Arab League User (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment - I don't really see any use for this info anywhere. It's really not notable and it is exceedingly obvious to anyone who knows how to read a map. If there is some notable connection between two countries, then that connection should be explained in either the countries' articles or in a bilateral relations article for the two countries. Otherwise, the fact that they border each other is not particularly relevant on its own. Also, your definition of "border" is pretty strange. Can we really say that France borders Morocco and Algeria? There is 400+ miles of water between France and Algeria at their closest points, and Morocco is even further away. SnottyWong ^confabulate 16:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

• Comment - well, it IS relevant ofcourse, i only added the article to inform the readers of the countries bordering the Organization, pretty much like the European Union article, or the African Union article for bordering nations...

especially that the Arab League is creating the Arab Neighboring policy...

• Delete Seems like a rather indiscriminate list, especially since the article is unreferenced and demonstrates no coverage or significance of the topic, and I couldn't find any coverage elsewhere. TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction•Creation} 18:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Delete Surely falls under "indiscriminate list", and probably original research. If sources are found showing a reason for such a collection, then it should be part of the Arab League article. First Light (talk) 18:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:46, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Enigma^msg 18:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
• Comment I'm still for delete. However when editors pretend to be stupid it looks bad. Any reasonable person is going to understand the reason this article was created. Borock (talk) 14:51, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

For this editor, at least, it was a lack of reliable sources showing a notable or sufficient reason to have an article about this list. Which leaves me puzzling whether I'm not so stupid after all, still just pretending to be stupid, or even worse: so stupid that people think I'm pretending when I'm really being serious :-o. This article by the same editor has related problems ("It (The Arab League) has an area of 14 million km², making it second only to the Russian Federation...").First Light (talk) 13:23, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

It was even worse before. The articles he created are poor, there are problems with most of the images, and the username itself poses problems. Enigma^msg 20:41, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed, unfortunately. I've removed the comparison of the Arab League to the Russian Federation, since one is a country and the other is a bunch of countries (apples and oranges), along with a few other obvious issues on some of his other articles (List of largest cities of the Arab League, Demographics of the Arab League. But yes, it's a bit of a mess. First Light (talk) 22:00, 2 July 2010 (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.