Deletion of Greek-Zimbabwean relations

Comment: contrary to some belief,  is not a license to create and keep articles based on the most spurious of mentions in news media without casting even a cursory critical glance of comparison against other articles of the same type. If it were, a person with a lone mention in a newspaper of their brief political activist involvement at the municipal level would be sufficient grounds for an article. A little tighter, more concise editing for ease of use, navigation and access of information goes a long way
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: while maybe not as notable as some bilates recently nominated for deletion, it still more than meets the inclusion standard of , and I don't see it as an exceptional case.  See http://www.somalipress.com/zimbabwe-overview/international-relations-zimbabwe-1134.htmlhttp://www.nytimes.com/1982/06/02/world/greece-and-zimbabwe-reach-accord-on-aid.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/I/International%20Relationshttp://www.highbeam.com/search.aspx?q=Greece%20Hopes%20to%20Strengthen%20Relationshttp://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=731316
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: per nom. As noted, these types of articles are not inherently notable (as witnessed by the many in recent days that have been deleted). This one is even less so as by their own admission Zimbabwe does not even have an embassy in Greece. The entire relation ship doesn't even seem that bilateral. Fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: It appears that the main argument for keeping revolves around a Greek Orthodox Bishop.  The removing that fact (largely because the Greek Orthodox Church and the country of Greece are separate entities) the relationship does not meet  and should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)