Deletion of Roy Halladay's perfect game

Comment: Yes, there is .  The solution to that is to create the fifteen missing articles, not to delete this one.  Regarding Grsz11's comment a couple of lines up, there's not time yet to demonstrate prolonged notability of ''this'' game, but BRMo's list shows it pretty well for perfect games in general
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: to Roy Halladay.  There are enough links from other articles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Roy_Halladay's_perfect_game to make a redirect rather than changing the link to Roy Halladay#perfect game.  We have a small number of articles in a :Category: MLB perfect games, most of which happened in years beginning with "2".  Things like Mark Buehrle's perfect game are a classic example of what's discouraged in #STATS (the preferred method would be to simply link to a website like baseball-reference.com).  When it comes to sports articles, the usual response is to whistle and look the other way
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: I think perfect games are rare enough to have their own article. #STATS doesn't apply here as the article isn't pure stats. There are books written on indiviual perfect games, so they have lasting notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Really, perfect games in baseball are incredibly rare, and this event is covered by enough reliable sources to warrant its own article. You can pound sand and scream  just because you don't want potential voters to know for a '''FACT''' that this deletion rationale ''failed'' at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armando Galarraga's near-perfect game and ''failed'' at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Buehrle's perfect game. The delete votes so far have been  caliber
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFF||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)