Talk:Argentina–Indonesia relations

Proposed merge with Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Suggest that Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear be merged with redirect into Argentina–Indonesia relations section Trade and Commerce. The subject appears to be an obscure legal case involving a trade dispute between the two countries that was resolved in Indonesia's favor by the WTO. There is not enough there for a stand alone article and frankly I don't think the subject passes GNG or EVENT. Sources are very thin and lacking in the diversity and depth of coverage normally expected. If the Relations article didn't exist I'd probably send it to AfD. Ad Orientem (talk) 13:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. This case was actually originally initiated by the EC and there are plenty of sources. Even if DS121 and DS123 are technically different cases, they are so closely related that they should be treated as a single topic.

I can't accept the idea that a case is just an event. Lawyers are primarily concerned with the judgement which is actually a work of literature (more likely to fall under NBOOK). Indeed the word "case" can be defined as the written memorandum of a decision. And the ratio decidendi of that decision is something else altogether. James500 (talk) 07:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

• Opposed for a number of reasons. Both articles are STUBS in that they are not informative, not inclusive of a broad description of either subject, and appear to be mere place holders. Indeed both Wiki entries are probably candidates for Summary Deletion because they fall rather short on being encyclopedic in scope. But that's not a fatal problem, I see that Editors are working on improvements and my suggestion is that the two pages do not get merged but that both pages get expanded upon, fleshed out until they are no longer basically stubs.

The page for footwear issues for imports is a good page to keep, it needs to have further research and more than just one country's issues should be added. I think we should keep that page and expand it -- assuming Editors have the time and will to do so. At the same time the extant article here is a good start and should reference the footware page. Both pages should remain tagged as stubs, and we should add the pages to the Wikipedia Editor Request process to see if Editors will do the research needed expand both of the pages. Damotclese (talk) 00:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Based on your above comments I am not sure we are talking about the same article. It is not about a broad issue involving footwear. It is the name of a legal case that was brought before the WTO by Indonesia against Argentina. It is a narrow case involving a trade dispute. Nothing more. I see little hope for expanding the article. Nor am I seeing anyone working on it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:16, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Argentina–Indonesia relations. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.mrecic.gov.ar/portal/seree/ditra/id.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205151214/http://www.kbri-buenosaires.org.ar/ to http://www.kbri-buenosaires.org.ar/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:35, 8 July 2017 (UTC)