Deletion of Legality of bestiality by country or territory

Comment: It's an odd topic, and there's certainly plenty of  issues, but it appears to have coverage in multiple reliable sources and thus passes . These sources include a https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2015.1100701 2016 paper published in ''The Journal of Sex Research'', a https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25492066/ 2014 paper in the ''Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law'', and a https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20053199840 2005 paper from Purdue University. I'm also finding law review articles (such as https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jael1&div=12&id=&page= this one) that cover the topic from a U.S.-centric perspective. It's unclear to me if this would be better in a list format or if this information would be better incorporated into an existing article or if this article is -worthy, which is why my !vote for keep is a weak one, (update: I think it's probably -worthy) though I believe that the legality of bestiality passes the bar in significant coverage when we consider academic sources. If we do keep it, the article needs significant revision to be in line with  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:GNG||WP:TNT||WP:TNT||WP:NOTADVOCACY||WP:NOR)