Deletion of Early 21st-century civil rights movement

Comment: The nomination statement, while extremely succinct, is correct. I commented about this article being synthesis Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard#Early_21st-century_civil_rights_movement|here at ORN and at the article's talk page. Everything discussed in this article is obviously noteworthy, but it's also all covered elsewhere. The article is cobbling together various current and recent events and treating them as a ''distinct'' "Early 21st century civil rights movement", which is |original research and for which there is little evidence in reliable sources. There is https://news3lv.com/news/local/black-lives-matter-protests-mark-historic-civil-rights-movement-unlv-professor-says this, but that is one professor, and he clearly is talking specifically about Black Lives Matter, which already has an article. There's also https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2020-06-12/new-civil-rights-movement-foreign-policy-win this, but this uses the word "maybe", and in any case we don't have enough to meet , nor can we get around the fact that gathering these current events under this label in the way the article does is synthesis. We need to avoid ecentism; the job of what to call this era and how to label its events falls to academic experts, not us Wikipedia editors. Any good and non-redundant material can be merged out to their respective topics
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:GNG||WP:R)

Comment: Wikipedia cannot say there is an "Early 21st-century civil rights movement" until |reliable sources begin to call it an "Early 21st-century civil rights movement", something that hasn't quite happened yet. This article really is |synthesis of existing sourcing. Under "21st-century civil rights movement", there's a https://oneill.law.georgetown.edu/black-lives-matter-the-21st-century-civil-rights-movement/#:~:text=Both%20movements%20call%20for%20social,protests%20to%20call%20for%20change.&text=Instead%2C%20this%2021stCentury,pervasive%20injustice%20and%20demanding%20change. law fellow asking if black lives matter is a 21st-century civil rights movement, but that just means BLM is notable, a https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/10/magazine/our-demand-is-simple-stop-killing-us.html NYTimes mag subtitled "How a group of black social media activists built the nation's first 21st-century civil rights movement." and https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/19/blacklivesmatter-birth-civil-rights-movement the guardian, but these again are about BLM specifically. There's a https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/why-blacks-need-another-civil-rights-movement/2012/03/08/gIQAZBlG7R_blog.html WaPo op-ed arguing that we need a 21st century CRM, but not saying there is one. "2020 civil rights movement" is pretty much a non-starter, there's https://spectrumnews1.com/ky/lexington/news/2020/06/22/west-end-louisville-thomas-english-protest-mural-colin-kaepernick-muhammad-ali-art local news. There are a couple of news articles writing about a second civil rights movement (https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/259670-missouri-football-and-the-second-civil-rights-movement The hill for one). However, sources, by and large, haven't recognized a widespread civil rights movement ongoing, and it's near impossible for something like that to be identified while it's happening. BLM is considered by some to be a new civil rights movement, but it's not yet clear that there's a larger defined movement outside of BLM (itself an organized movement
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:SYNTH)

Comment: the article is a  which assumes facts not in evidence. This is an amalgamation of various disjointed protests that are brought together to create 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV||WP:SYNTH)