Deletion of Bangladesh–Ireland relations

Comment: Coverage of plans to improve relations IS coverage of relations. This subject has received  in multiple reliable sources (e.g., https://www.thedailystar.net/news-detail-84243 1 https://thefinancialexpress.com.bd/national/tasneem-invites-irish-president-to-open-embassy-in-bangladesh-1574319307 2 https://unb.com.bd/category/Bangladesh/tasneem-presents-credentials-to-irish-president/35297 3
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: I previously had no reason to doubt the |good faith of this nomination, having had (IIRC) no particular interactions with either the user or the subject area.  However, further review shows that the nominator's abuse of the deletion process with regard to bilateral relations articles Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_International_relations/Bilateral_relations_task_force#Attempt_to_merge_all_of_the_stubby_articles|has been an ongoing problem for more than 10 years! In that context, it seems particularly noteworthy that this user has not sought to notify the article creators or (AFAICT) any of the relevant WikiProjects or taskforces. Such an omission might be excusable from a new editor trying to learn the ropes, but unfortunately something much less savory appears to be going on here
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: I'll admit that this article has better sourcing than a lot of the X-Y relations articles that end up at AfD, but I don't think there's enough to pass to the (low) bar of . Only a few of the sources actually ''directly'' address the actualy topic of the article--these countries' bilateral relationship--and none of them do so in any real detail
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per FOARP.  In addition, to respond to this boilerplate nom in the spirit in which it was posted, I must once again note that this nom, like many others on AfD, is based on a fundamental misreading of , which states the conditions under which notability (i.e. appropriateness as an article topic) is ''presumed''.  To claim that a "failure" to meet the GNG means that ''non-notability'' is presumed is to flip the guideline on its head.  The GNG does not provide grounds for deletion. In particular, in this case, such an article makes sense (i.e. the topic is "|notable") because it makes far more sense to assign encyclopedic infomration about Bangladesh-Ireland relations to a single article than to duplicate it in separate Bangladesh and Ireland articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:N)

Comment: Search any book on the foreign relations of Bangladesh. If Ireland appears ''at all'', it's only in a list, such as countries that make up the EU. We do our readers a disservice when we string together non-independent primary sources, routine diplomatic-speak reprinted from government press releases, and dress up the negligible result as "bilateral relations" worthy of an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is |not an indiscriminate collection of information. Deletion does not insult Bangladesh or Ireland. It doesn't mean they have no contact whatsoever, but anything worth saying about their relationship can be said in a sentence or two in Foreign relations of Bangladesh and Foreign relations of Ireland
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)