Deletion of Effects of Brexit on science and technology

Comment: Too much of an |essay, and  and  problems
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Essays (WP:ESSAY||WP:OR||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: I dislike the title, but that's a minor matter. The |essay-like and  parts need improving, but that is too. This is a live, important, and much-reported topic. Sources, easily found in just ''one'' UK  newspaper, ''The Guardian'': https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/jul/12/uk-scientists-dropped-from-eu-projects-because-of-post-brexit-funding-fears UK scientists dropped from EU projects because of post-Brexit funding fears 12 Jul 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/oct/06/brexit-not-good-news-for-british-science-warn-new-nobel-laureates Brexit 'not good news for British science' warn new Nobel laureates 6 Oct 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2016/dec/20/scientists-need-to-wake-up-to-the-opportunities-of-brexit Scientists need to wake up to the opportunities of Brexit 20 Dec 2016, https://www.theguardian.com/science/occams-corner/2017/jan/17/brexit-negotiations-voice-science-loud-clear- The voice of science must be loud and clear in Brexit negotiations 17 Jan 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/07/brexit-putting-british-scientists-at-risk-of-becoming-bit-part-players-warns-report-prospect Brexit putting British scientists at risk of becoming bit-part players, warns report 7 Mar 2017. That's not an exhaustive list, but merely a selection of some of the results on the ''first'' page of a search
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTESSAY||WP:OR||WP:RS)

Comment: Violates . Too much speculation (even if it is sourced) for an upcoming or in-progress event like this to be appropriate for an article at this time.  Wikipedia is supposed to behind the ball and not engage in . That's pretty symptomatic throughout the article as it wanders around statements of what may happen or what the British government hopes to do. It clearly hasn't moved past the point of current events towards an encyclopedic topic yet given the amount of flux the topic will be under. I'm sure the topic could be notable in the future, but it's too soon right now
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: Perhaps a name change is in effect, but the article is sourced to reliable sources, passing .  doesn't apply here because it's verifiable, sourced, speculation about the future, not baseless guessing, which is what CRYSTAL covers. If there's an issue with sourcing, that should be taken up on the talk page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: WP:OR, 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)