Deletion of Derek Chauvin

Comment: Here's why: '''''': The new article significantly expands on the text about Chauvin in the article about the killing, including background information, information about his arrest, charges and detainment status, and his marriage. '''''': The article does not satisfy nr. 3: The event is highly significant and Chauvin's role is substantial, as the catalyst of the whole incident and the following protests and unrest. '''''': This is one of the, if not THE most documented, talked about and influential crime in the United States since 9/11. Chauvin's involvement is well documented. We have articles about James Holmes (mass murderer) and Dylann Roof that should be deleted if we can't allow an article about Chauvin
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:A10||WP:BLP1E||WP:CRIME)

Comment: This person is the very definition of a "subject notable for only one event" and should not have an article as per . The only sources we have about him are from the last couple weeks. Come back in a year or two and see if there's anything notable about him that isn't a direct result of him killing of George Floyd. Maybe there'll be more detailed sources about his entire life, maybe he'll become notable in other ways, or maybe he'll remain simply the guy in that video
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per Hut. No indication, |yet, that the subject warrants an stand-alone article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: per {{u|Geo_Swan}}, {{u|Kebabpizza}}, {{u|Kire1975}}, {{u|Casprings}}, {{u|Flaviusvulso}}, {{u|Davey2116}}.  There is voluminous  on Chauvin per Google with 24 million hits on his name--clearly enough for a separate article.  Although, it is certainly true that he is notable for his association with a single event, the voluminous  about ''his role'' in that event, his past history that is being reviewed with a fine tooth comb, make a content fork the only appropriate way to avoid having the event article explode beyond all reasonable proportions.   says
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:RS||WP:BIO1E)

Comment: At this time there isn't anything about Chauvin that can't be covered by Killing of George Floyd. The marriage stuff is all . I think SportingFlyer's call for salt is prudent given the circumstances
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: I keep looking but not finding anything other than the one event. We don't have "biographies" of people who did this shitty thing once unless there is lasting coverage. I'm not convinced this will get lasting coverage, and it's way too soon to tell yet. There are a lot of notable murders, and a lot of articles on those  murders where we have no separate article on the perpetrator - and we don't actually have this as a murder yet (what with innocent until proven guilty and all). Overall, / applies. Outraged does not amount to substantive coverage
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:BLPCRIME)

Comment: Per  KidAd
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: Satisfies the criteria for inclusion under  as explained by Valoem
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)