Deletion of Marius (giraffe)

Comment: to Copenhagen Zoo#Giraffe controversy, The animal only gained notoriety due to the media attention, the Giraffe itself was of no significant interest in to the Giraffe population in captivity or the wild. The controversy though does raise questions surrounding the ethics and treatment of animals born in captivity as was only contentious due to the other options being available to prevent the slaughter of an otherwise healthy animal.  The Redirect to the Copenhagen Zoo would be appropriate as the issue was localised there.  To retain the page would IMHO be against  and 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:CRITICISM)

Comment: Interesting to see how many clever editors already know how long this topic will be relevant, how many think they already know the full impact of the event, and how many inexplicably think this happens every day. Clearly passes , is reasonably well-written and the subject is creating a lot of internet traffic, far more than the zoo ever has. Another AfD six months down the line may produce a more obvious result, but keep it for now. People who don't understand the topic should stay out of AfDs
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The only unusual thing about the entire incident is the zoo's terrible public relations work and typical Danish stand-offishness, neither of which are any surprise. No lasting impact, doesn't pass ; section for Copenhagen Zoo seems appropriate
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)