Deletion of 2016 Donald Trump Chicago rally protest

Comment: I agree that having both this article and Protests of the Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016, seems gratuitous, and the early creation of the Chicago article may have fell afoul of the guideline not to "rush to create articles" (). But a few points: 1) Despite comments to this effect in the AfD for Protests of the Donald Trump campaign, there doesn't actually seem to be too much overlap in the real content of the two articles, and there does on the contrary seem to be enough material for a detailed run-through of the Chicago event, which would be a distraction on the wider page. 2) The Chicago protest does also seem to be individually notable above and beyond the wider theme of protests in the Donald Trump campaign.  states, "Events are also very likely to be notable if they have widespread (national or international) impact and were very widely covered in diverse sources, especially if also re-analyzed afterwards". The Chicago protests were covered internationally (e.g.: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-35791008 BBC; http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/trump-blames--thugs--for-cancelled-chicago-campaign-rally-/42016234 Swissinfo; http://www.asahi.com/articles/ASJ3D44FVJ3DUHBI015.html Asahi Shinbun), and have also been the subject of specific continued re-analysis (http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/14/in-defense-of-trumps-chicago-protesters/ "In Defense of Trump's Chicago Protesters" from today; http://theweek.com/articles/612481/liberal-protesters-didnt-stop-donald-trump-chicago-helped "Liberal protesters didn't stop Donald Trump in Chicago. They helped him.", likewise today
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BREAKING||WP:EVENTCRIT)

Comment: Perhaps a misunderstanding of ? This was not a routine news announcement. I think the nominator has confused an article based entirely on news sources as a reason for deletion. Anyway, there are numerous reliable sources for this event. A merge discussion with the wider protest article should probably be treated separately. Considering that this is larger than the so-called "main article", I don't think a merge request would be successful at the moment anyway
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Easily passes . Only likely to fade into the larger article if many more protests are on this scale, but that is crystal-ball gazing at this point
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:EVENTCRIT)

Comment: Major even in 2016 Presidental election.  Notability validated by massive coverage, including ongoing Monday morning quarterback analysis by pretty much ever political pundit in the country (not to mention newspaper coverage in Antarctica and on the North Pole.) National political polls have already come out evaluating the impact on the Republican primary electorate.   is meant to exclude article on routine, local and minor news events.  
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:SNOWBALL)