Deletion of List of Jewish leaders in the Land of Israel (2nd nomination)

Comment: per , , and . Just by the name, I can see that this page could potentially contain an infinite number of individuals, which is certainly not in the spirit of . The page doesn't even begin to mention all the Orthodox Judaism|Orthodox rabbis, Rebbes, and rosh yeshivas who have lived in Israel. I also agree with Roscelese that the page is really a |coatrack for an underlying POV of proving that Israel belongs to the Jews
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH||WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:COATRACK||WP:NOTDIRECTORY||WP:COATRACK)

Comment: like my first rationale, combining biblical figures with modern figures and figuring out what they have in common with the vague terms of "leader" and "Land of Israel" is a violation of our |original research policy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: as in the past two AfDs. And as repeatedly explained that being Jewish means to belong to both a religion, Judaism, ''as well as to'' an ethnicity, see Jews, unlike other religions. Thus the people on this list are  from either one or both perspectives. There are enough  to back this up. Not sure why the nominator is wielding this axe. Recorded Jewish history that stretches over 3,330 years, during that time there have been a variety of Jewish religious and secular, even anti-religious and in between leaders. The Jewish people, over the bulk of their history, have referred to their homeland as the Land of Israel ארץ ישראל , so not sure, but is that what is ticking the nominator off? since there are so many anti-Israel disputes always on the go on WP that it's hard to keep track of all the violations of OTBATTLEGROUND and  and hopefully this is not another excuse for another such  and  dispute. Thank you
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS||WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND||WP:DONOTDISRUPT||WP:CONTENT||WP:POV)

Comment: this is OR at best, and a political toy at worse.  Any list whose inclusion criteria are so broad as to include all those people under the same heading is meaningless except as a political talking point.  I would support its existence if there were reliable sources ''that put those people together in the same grouping''; until that happens, this is |synthesis of cherry picked individuals.  &mdash;&nbsp
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: My gut feeling says "delete", as it's a messy article with synthesis and OR issues. But it does not seem to match any of the fourteen reasons given in -REASON. I also have a problem with the nominator's use of terms like "grossly obvious POV aim" which looks a bit like a failure to AGF. I think it's generally a good idea to focus on the content of the article rather than trying to read the minds of the contributors. Still, I do tend to agree that it's a pretty awful article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL)

Comment: Nothing have changed from the last  nomination.The article is properly sourced by .If there are some POV problem they should be |fixed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:SOFIXIT)

Comment: This article certainly has  and the POV can be cleaned up
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)