Deletion of Estonia – Sri Lanka relations (2nd nomination)

Comment: it seems most of you have presented . I doubt you even looked at the sources Treasury found. They are weak indeed. This topic lacks indepth third party coverage. Please find some better source than Treasury than simply turning up and !voting
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:JUSTAVOTE)

Comment: per , sources found by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEY)

Comment: I have examined the sources in the article and those presented, and as much as the topic still doesn't seem notable to me, it nevertheless (a) passes the test of |significant discussion in reliable independent sources and (b) the various markers that we have used to determine the notability of other bilateral relations topics (state visits, mutual embassies, significant bilateral agreements and projects).  It therefore should be kept.  And I'd again urge everyone participating to |remain civil.  We've done a LOT of bilateral relations AfDs at this point, and it's pretty clear that the community doesn't see attempts to delete them, or attempts to save them, on whatever grounds, as either foolish or in bad faith
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CIVIL)