Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mosley v United Kingdom
or '''Merge'''. The case certainly ''does'' ; "the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred". This is not possible to determine yet, since it may well set no case law. As such, the best option here is to remove the article until it can be shown that the case is important. It also fails Wikipedia:Notability (events); on the first point, "lasting effects", there is (obviously) no evidence this has led to anything important or groundbreaking. "Depth of coverage" is key here; "'''Media sources sometimes report on events because of their similarity (or contrast, or comparison) to another widely reported incident'''". This case is only considered important by the news because of the previous cases; as such, it should either be deleted until some kind of importance can be shown past a brief flurry of news coverage, or merged into the main article on the previous case. This is merely an extension of an other case, and in many cases it is more appropriate to include the information in the original article than a new one
— User:Ironholds, 21:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:CRYSTAL (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)