Deletion of Tapuah Junction stabbing (2010)

Comment: I don't understand how the sources not meet .Telegraph,BBC,NYPOST,JPOST,HAARETZ and Boston Globe.Yes they reporting the same event so details will be the same but there are not mirroring each other
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:DIVERSE)

Comment: This is clear , just as the nominator stated. I don't understand all the Keep votes; I don't see lasting significant coverage. It's a single incident whose notability does not rise to the level required by Wikipedia
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Article meets  and per  I believe {{u|E.M.Gregory}} clearly edited the page in a way to show it had coverage over the course of several years
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:HEY)

Comment: WP:NEWS deletion rationale cannot be applied as it not "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities " it high-profile criminal act that was covered by multiple  sources per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:DIVERSE||WP:NCRIME)

Comment: that this AFD is part of a recent series of terrorism-related AFDs in which Nom attempts to change the usual outcome of articles about terrorist attacks.  At least in recent years, terrorist attacks have been judged notable under, when they meet , , and , and, if brought to AFD a year or so later, have been uniformly kept if there has been  or .  Here GSlick, persuades a fellow editor that this is the usual outcome https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheGracefulSlick&diff=792690727&oldid=792690269.  Obviously, Slick and I have differ.  But editors coming to this page should know that this is part of a campaign to shift the usual outcome in a category of topics
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NCRIME||WP:GEOSCOPE||WP:INDEPTH||WP:DIVERSE||WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE||WP:LASTING)