Deletion of Marsden-Donnelly harassment case

Comment: Passes |primary notability criterion: multiple, nontrivial, independent, secondary sources.  Widely reported, non-local sensationalism at worst.  Inclusion of this material in Rachel Marsden would grossly imbalance it; that's why it was |spun out. &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:SS)

Comment: due to its local importance (it is a HUGE story here) and also because it is extremely notable, judging by how many |reliable sources there are for this case. Any problems with the article can easily be fixed, if that's the case. There's no reason to delete the whole article altogether
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)