Deletion of Bill O'Reilly sexual harassment lawsuit

Comment: Unnecessary  weight given to a scandal.  What is in the main article is a paragraph in length, which is a sufficient summary of the matter.  Remember that we're not here to debate the tired canards of "its reliably sourced!" and whatnot
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: per #NEWS, , 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:PERSISTENCE||WP:POVFORK)

Comment: per , adequately met. Merges can be always discussed later but it has no bearing in an AfD. Arguments based on  make no sense, because UNDUE relates to content ''within'' an article, not to content between multiple articles. If anything, the existence of a split article helps to ease  concerns in the main O'Reilly article, while allowing us to enter into the issue in detail
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:UNDUE||WP:UNDUE)