Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Estonia–Luxembourg relations
No offense to anyone but there is a double standard emerging on these articles in general. Many claim (not naming names) that State Visits can't help determine these articles notable but no policy can confirm this notion, others say they are but once again no policy can confirm that. What we need is a honest to god policy on bilateral relations so that way we don't waste resources here at Afd with constant article after article going up on the block. Secondly I quote , ''"Without a secondary source, a primary source may be used only to make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is verifiable by a reasonable person."'' So basically Primary sources can be used (in some instances) another notion that keeps being dismissed despite the fact that almost every article on Wikipedia in some way or another uses primary sources. I continue  is a official guideline of wikipedia, something that should be looked at to help us choose when to use a primary source or not but when it comes to policy  part of  I believe, outweighs  per . Per this the notion that primary sources can never be used is absurd. As I reiterate what I said at the beginning I am not mad at any user in particular, instead I am mad we have yet to have any clear policy on this something we need before constantly deleting these articles or even keeping them
— User:Marcusmax, 03:13, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:PRIMARY||WP:GNG||WP:PRIMARY||WP:V||WP:GNG||WP:PG (Wikipedia:No original research)