Deletion of Megxit

Comment: to Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex#Marriage and fatherhood per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: unfortunately. Clearly passes NOTNEWS by spades; there's continued coverage in reliable outlets (internationally), and although the name is somewhat of a tabloid tripe, the story itself is not. And, as if it needs repeating with so many experienced editors in the room: changing a page's title is about |as far from a reason for deletion as we can get. That's for the talk page with a cucumber bleedin' crustless-sandwich on the side
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ATADD)

Comment: per  – Wait until the term gets traction. Can be mentioned briefly in the main biographies of both protagonists, though
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: for now. Way 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: per  - Let's address in section on their Wiki pages, and then a separate article can be created if there's sufficient notability established ''over time'' to warrant this subject having its own separate page. Until that time, there's no reason to even request a '''Merge''' since there's all of one sentence of material on the page
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: per (part of) nom('s rationale), {{u|Britishfinance}}, and others. '''Oppose rename''', per {{u|Amakuru}} and {{u|Arbil44}} below, and also '''oppose merge''' with future Sussex Royal Foundation, per part of {{u|Drmies}}'s rationale below, as this is much broader than the pair's charitable foundation. '''Lukewarm''' to a future '''merge''' into one or more articles, assuming one or more suitable merger targets present themselves. It's a very real current event, which will have historical significance given the emergency meeting, dubbed the Sandringham Summit, called by Elizabeth II|The Queen. It might be |too soon, but in this case, that's hardly sufficient a reason to outright delete. {{s|I'd be mildly supportive of draftification/userification to add sourcing, but}} It's an event that ultimately should have an article and we need to respect |attribution and the contributors of this article against this article being |blown up and re-done weeks later by someone else
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:ATT||WP:TNT)

Comment: as passes the standard for |NOTNEWS by miles and even if |TOOSOON was a policy then this is most definitely not too soon. The gist of TOOSOON is that it has to be |verifiable by non-independent sources. Of course this is verifiable by non-independent sources. I have no opinion on the rename
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:TOOSOON||WP:V)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)