Deletion of R. v Evans and McDonald

Comment: mainly per . Absolutely no enduring historical significance, even if the general notability guideline is currently met
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: Per . Also Evans has just been found guilty and sentenced so there are more sources that have come out in the last hour which can be added to improve the article. It would be really ugly to put this in the Ched Evans article as there is too much that can be written
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: and '''redirect''' to Ched Evans, with content also summarised at Clayton McDonald, per . If the case is in future cited in a number of works relating to the wider context of sexism in football, then perhaps it would be  to reinstate the article then
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:DUE)

Comment: the trial is indeed absolutely notable as it (the trial) has had extensive coverage in numerous news sources. The article is exceedingly well sourced. |Notability is not temporary, it satisfies  now and is not required to have ongoing coverage. The original reasons for creating the article, detailed by PatGallacher, are sensible and perfectly acceptable. Any discussion with respect to merging can be had at the appropriate article talk page(s), this is articles for deletion, not articles for merging/redirection
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTEMP||WP:GNG)

Comment: prominent trials, especially those that have ongoing legal sequelae, are notable.  The many |reliable sources attest to the case's notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: Considerable media coverage that satisfies , eg http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/23/ched-evans-rape-culture-twitter?newsfeed=true Guardian http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17810574 BBC. This is more notable than most court cases and is not 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: Per the above. Almost voted Speedy Keep on this. Clearly notable per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: to Ched Evans. (note: at the time of writing the case has just concluded, subject to any appeals. Evans has been found guilty, McDonald has been found not guilty.) The notability of this case is solely due to the identity of the defendants. The guideline at  suggest that when the perpetrator of a crime already has an article "''it may be appropriate to create a wp:SPINOUT|sub-article, but only if this is necessitated by considerations of |article size.''" We have no such size issues here, a section in Ched Evans summarising the main points of the case would be appropriate. While McDonald was also a defendant, he has been cleared, and good BLP practice involves not retaining an article that drags his name through the mud
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:CRIME||WP:LENGTH)