Deletion of Peace Treaty with North Korea

Comment: WP:RECENT Please see my comment above, criticism for   with two languages (English and Korean), from my understanding, if we need to find the trustworthy references (news, books or scholar), it would be necessary to see the well-grounded source with both English and Korean language because the  geological location of the issue is Korean peninsula. For quick translation, the famous google translate can be used
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)

Comment: Just cannot overlook the  we would need to use to support keeping this article. This is an essay on a hypothetical scenario and a disorderly one at that; too many opinions and topics are covered (inadequately). Please do not merge or redirect this essay to Korean reunification for there is no benefit
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTALBALL)

Comment: Thank you for Relisting discussions and guiding us about Wikipedia |policy on content forks
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)

Comment: by OP). Additionally, the article violates . That is, every speculation about what ''might happen'' is pure opinion by more-or-less informed commentators. There can be no facts about something that not certain to occur. (Also note how the articles uses the term "Peace Treaty" as a proper noun – this illustrates that it is not encyclopedic.) As NOTOPINION recommends, the material should go into n:|Wikinews. To do this properly, the article should be deleted or made into a redirect to :Korean conflict
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTOPINION)

Comment: Is an essay. Fails . As an interesting but relevant aside - see Talk:Second Korean War (which will also AFD soon / reduce to redirect) - which described the current events (before modifications - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Second_Korean_War&oldid=797771732 as the second Korean war
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:BALL)

Comment: WP:CRYSTAL =  - Please see my comment above ( On  - explanation the cases is required rather than merely stating that it violates the policy
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:BALL||WP:DISCUSSAFD)

Comment: as per  and other issues like #NEWS, recentism, and POV pushing topic in several languages . In any case, this is a 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:TNT)

Comment: low-quality content about a vague topic.  Korean War should discuss the historical issues; any new treaty that Donald Trump or Kim Jong Un might do in the future is entirely 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: per nomination - Please see my comment above about  and 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENT||WP:CRYSTAL)