Deletion of Emperor of Exmoor

Comment: The sources published prior to this newsworthy event negate the concerns of  and the fact of the current coverage coupled with the prior publications demonstrate notability beyond . I am also concerned that |AfD was the first reaction of the nominator. A read of  indicates other actions might have been more appropriate
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:1E||WP:AFD||WP:BEFORE)

Comment: But anyone want to try an argument based on a variation of BLP1E?! Sources from before the shooting remove  basis: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1317755/Return-The-Exmoor-Emperor-Beast-biggest-wild-animal.html Daily Mail 1, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1223981/The-20-stone-Casanova-garden-JANE-FRYER-visits-couple-playing-host-herd-mating-red-deer.html Daily Mail 2, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6865411.ece The Times and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6267525/Largest-wild-animal-in-Britain-is-300lb-9ft-stag-the-Exmoor-Emperor.html Telegraph as above. Took an odd bit of searching to winkle them out mind
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: clearly notable. Just because it's in the news doesn't necessarily mean it violates ; this is clearly of enduring interest and relevance. Can we get a snow close on this AfD so as not to scuttle the article's chances at 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:DYK)