Deletion of Philippines–United Kingdom relations

Comment: As the consensus is already quite clear, I recommend that we close this discussion as soon as possible. |It's quite cold here already
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a valid reason for deletion. Just because it may seem obscure to you doesn't mean that people won't find it useful. There are several articles on Wikipedia about relatively obscure topics (like Mami Kawada|Japanese singers or Second Congo War|African conflicts that rarely get Western coverage), but surely such article may be useful for ''someone''. As for the topic itself, the UK is one of the Philippines' major trading partners, and their bilateral relations get relatively good coverage over here. Surely notability has been established here. I suggest |trouting the nominator for this invalid nomination
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Whacking with a wet trout (WP:TROUT)

Comment: spaced ndash}} The topic is notable, and prior to nominating articles for deletion from the encyclopedia, the nominator should consider following the suggestions for source searching at  in the future
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: Topic is notable. Nominator probably |just doesn't like it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: This is an invalid criteria for deletion that is tantamount to . Clearly this is a valid topic with non-trivial coverage. Regards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)