Deletion of Chia Hong v. Facebook

Comment: per nom and per Hisashiyarouin, without prejudice to recreation down the road if new sources and developments merit. It's because of articles like these that we have  and expect  coverage of a topic. At this stage we accomplish little more than creating an echo chamber for the allegations, without any indication of their substance or likelihood of surviving even preliminary legal proceedings. Most lawsuits, even those that get some initial press and/or are against prominent companies, do not ultimately satisfy GNG, so there's no reason to give it the benefit of the doubt unlike with some other current events. And no, Pechmerle, whether a lawsuit is a class action (not that this lawsuit is, anyway) has nothing to do with whether it merits an article. Whether the lawsuit might merit a mention within another article, however, is a separate question (though don't forget 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:LASTING||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: Passes . {{u|Mrfrobinson}}, what part of GNG do you think this fails
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)