Deletion of Wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton

Comment: this is an obvious example of , an article on a presumed future event that is not yet scheduled, let alone certain to happen. A wedding ''can'' be a notable topic for an article - we have Wedding of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Lady Diana Spencer and Wedding of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Camilla Parker Bowles  - and ''if'' it happens, this one arguably will be just as notable as those. But for the time being, there just isn't enough content to justify an independent article, and what we have can easily be merged into the articles on Prince William of Wales and Kate Middleton
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: Royal weddings are state occasions that generate a great deal of public interest and publicity.   does not really apply here: even if the engagement were broken off this would still be an event that will be remembered a long time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: All over the news in Britain; since it has been confirmed it is not a case of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: with the  argument. Point&nbsp;1 of CRYSTAL says "Individual '''scheduled or expected future events''' should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." The event is notable and almost certain to take place. While I'm aware that  is not a valid argument, we should at least look at general practice with regards to, say, future elections (see United States presidential election, 2012) or future sporting events (see 2016 Summer Olympics). Royal weddings may be rarer and more randomly spaced than elections and sporting events, but surely similar considerations should apply
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:OTHERSTUFF)

Comment: including an article on this subject isn't recentism, as Wedding of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Lady Diana Spencer|comparable events from thirty years ago are still notable. Nor does the article violate , because the event is very likely to happen (the policy doesn't say future events have to be scheduled), it would be notable if it had already occured, and even if the wedding is called off the event may still be notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: As above,  does not seem to apply in this case.  Royal weddings such as this are the source of much attention as is evidenced by the BBC article used as a reference
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: I wholeheartedly agree that this is a notable topic and worthy of inclusion. That is, inclusion once it ''|happens''. What if they suddenly broke up? The article would only contain "The wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton never happened." Delete now, restore later. It's simple as that
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: I !voted speedy redirect as it had already been merged, but now that's been changed, it's been redirected and the other article is being governed by this AFD. So I have struck my previous !vote and now say keep.  allows this article as it is a notable even that is almost certain to take place
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: this is definately rystal ball (who says it cant be called for any reason?), and these kidna thigns is what makes wikipedia a tool of ecentism more than encyclpaedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyrights (WP: C||WP:R)