Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis Suárez racial abuse incident

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Killiondude (talk) 23:03, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Luis Suárez racial abuse incident

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is unneeded while main content is covered at Luis_Suárez.The content also violates WT:NPOV and WP:COI. Shreerajtheauthor (talk) 17:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How does it violate WP:COI. AIRcorn (talk) 20:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 05:49, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 05:49, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 05:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 05:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I really really dislike this article and would love nothing more than for it to be deleted. It is a NPOV and BLP nightmare. However it clearly passes WP:GNG. Maybe it would be better off redirected to his main article, but it is probably alright in its present form. I just noticed Luis Suárez controversies which is ten times worse and should be deleted as a WP:POV fork if nothing else. I see it was kept as no consenus Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis Suárez controversies three years ago. I think I will nominate it now. AIRcorn (talk) 08:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No need for a separate article. Szzuk (talk) 22:44, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't merit a separate article. Giant Snowman 12:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - already covered in sufficient detail in the player's article. Not an incident that has gained sufficient sustained coverage to be notable as an incident on its own. Fenix down (talk) 15:32, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - content is of importance, but can go into the player's article. Deathlibrarian (talk) 06:15, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.