Deletion of List of 2012 NFL replacement officials

Comment: as a massive , content fork violation. According to our current guidelines, none of these officials were notable prior to this lockout, not notable now, and after all the regular referees comes back from the lockout, they will be heading back to their jobs as high school teachers and so forth and will likely never become notable again. This article simply reads like an attack page showing how unqualified that all these officials are, or the blown calls they associated with so far, which is deservedly mentioned elsewhere without any names being involved
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: There are enough https://www.google.com/search?q=nfl+replacement+officials&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=nfl+replacement+officials&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=K1f&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbs=qdr:m&tbm=nws&prmd=imvnsu&source=lnt&sa=X&psj=1&ei=WndjULfRL8OryQGPnYDAAw&ved=0CB8QpwUoBA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=ef00329b30b2b2ca&biw=1280&bih=846 news hits on "nfl replacement officials" that a list of them would qualify under , whether it be as a standalone article or merged into another article (e.g. 2012 NFL referee lockout, unless the article is deemed |too large). This should not be deleted. Per , it's unclear if List of NFL officials is meant to be a complete list or limited to entries that meet |notability criteria (i.e. deserve their own article). Otherwise, that might also be a candidate for a merge target as well
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:SIZE||WP:CSC||WP:N)

Comment: with List of NFL officials, and maybe also create redirects for all the referees who are currently redlinked to that page as well. I agree with Frank on this one. I disagree with Roy Smith that this is a a violation of  because they have been around since early August and have received widespread coverage since then
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENT)

Comment: The list meets  and all entries are allowable per ;  however, I am torn with whether it is appropriate to enumerate a list where virtually all the members are not notable.  It would be an easier decision for me if most members were notable, and the non-notable were mentioned to complete the list.  It seems like an m:inclusionism vs m:deletionism argument at this point, and I have no issue with either in this case
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:LISTN||WP:CSC)