Deletion of Australia–Uruguay relations

Comment: Inherently, bilateral relations are not notable, however, there are exceptions if they are widely mentioned in |reliable sources; in this case, the article is referenced well with reliable sources, so it passes our |notability standards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N)

Comment: per improvements made per |WP:AFTER and notability shown
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: as the political intersection equivalent of : There was a fishing incident between the two countries. That's about it. No more notable than a randomly chosen pair of countries' relations, nor than the average Pokemon
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: another one of those articles |that establish notability through substantive coverage in |reliable, third party sources.  I see no argument presented to treat this as a highly unusual case, or any reason it needs a highly irregular outcome
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: Meets the |general notability guideline. I am not convinced by any of the rationales for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)