Deletion of Archbishop Wood HS Alumni Gay Hate Crime'''

Comment: The subject of the article itself--the (alleged) physical assault against two gay men in Philadelphia--has not shown the requisite |enduring significance or |widespread impact to be a notable event.  Furthermore, as this story is still developing, there is no evidence this event will have coverage in reliable independent sources |beyond the current news cycle.  Additionally, I agree with
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LASTING||WP:GEOSCOPE||WP:PERSISTENCE)

Comment: per , , possibly  for Hate crime laws in the United States, and possibly , and still touching on #G10 (for which it was already speedy-deleted once).  Cowlibob has it right in the above response, citing , , and .  It only happened a week ago, and doesn't seem to be a national event for the general public, let alone an international encyclopedic topic of historic relevance.  The article's creation, tone, and supporters have made it clear that it this is a textbook case of Wikipedia:Righting great wrongs, in which some specific thing tweaks already-riled advocates, who then decide there is no inappropriate forum to get the "big truth" out and anyone who won't give them a free soapbox must be mistaken or working for The Enemy.  But |Wikipedia is not a soapbox, not every injustice against gay people is the Stonewall riots, and not every public beating or other obnoxious crime qualifies for a separate Wikipedia article to memorialize it, even if it's nasty: see not only Wikipedia:Righting great wrongs but the related concept Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause.  There's also a  and #G10 issue: This article's  pushing|POV pushing extends to what seems like a premeditated rush to defame one specific person by name as far and irrevocably as possible, in case that individual is cleared or otherwise not destroyed to the advocates' satisfaction later.  If the article is kept, there is no harm in referring to the person by description and relationship with the school, rather than by identifiable name, and then adding the name later if the person is named by police, indicted, or holds a press conference.  But forcing the name onto Wikipedia, the 5th-most-visted site on the web, makes it harder to undo the effect; claiming that less-attended media sites are doing it too is not an excuse, particularly as it is based on leaks by unnamed sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:NOTSOAP||WP:COATRACK||WP:BLP||WP:CSD||WP:LASTING||WP:GEOSCOPE||WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:NOTSOAP||WP:BLP||WP:CSD||WP:POV)

Comment: One of four places the  has put this material in an apparent attempt to smear the school (two in userspace, this article, and the article about the school). This is the worst of the four as it identifies one of the supposed perpetrators by name. It's horrific, but we're not a news outlet. We have severe BLP and NPOV issues. If the topic has  extensive and long=lasting coverage it can be covered then, but in a more appropriate manner
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA)