Deletion of Radical Islam in Australia

Comment: as a  from Islam in Australia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK)

Comment: It seems like a clear case of . This may not be intentional on the part of the original article creator, but it's definitely a collection of news topics without any scholarly research tying them together
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTHESIS)

Comment: per : the article doesn't seek to place the issue in context, and is a  from the Islam in Australia article which violates  and . Much of the content of the article is material which was rejected or disputed in the Islam in Australia article, and an obvious problem with this article is that there's no clear definition of what 'radical Islam' is, with many of the sources being claims in the tabloid media rather than sober analysis by actual experts on this topic. I just removed several claims which were cited to opinion articles by conservative columnists who are in no ways experts on the topic, as well as some claims about the views of a living person which weren't supported by the citation given: this was a clear violation of the core policy , and a blockable offence for whoever added it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT||WP:POVFORK||WP:NPOV||WP:UNDUE||WP:BLP)

Comment: and '''Salt''' this article violates  and  its also a  the lead of the article has no association with the articles context, the sections in the body of the article have no direct association with each other except the implied religious connection
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:UNDUE||WP:SYNTH)

Comment: and '''Salt'''. Quite a few primary sources used, giving away the fact that this is a work of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)