Deletion of Controversies related to prevalence of Jews in leadership roles in Hollywood

Comment: anti-semitic |coatrack
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: A valid  sub-article of Antisemitism in the United States. The "Jews run Hollywood" idea is a cliché widely known even on my side of the Atlantic, and appears to generate sufficient media coverage to deserve treatment in an encyclopedia. If the article reads like a coatrack for the various anti-semites it covers, rewrite it per  rather than deleting it, but it doesn't read very coatracky to me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Summary style (WP:SS||WP:NPOV)

Comment: violates ,  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN||WP:NOR||WP:NPOV)

Comment: Basically a  to parade a collection of collection of assertions about Jewish people in Hollywood.  No need for this ''at all
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: I am sorry, but wouldn’t this be classified as |Orginal Research?  There is no film with this title, there is no book with this title, there is no documentary with this title.  In fact, I could not find anything published, from reliable - third party - independent sources with this title.  Other than Wikipedia.  Have I missed something?  Are we now publishing original investigation and opinions?  Thanks
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: lots of sources all cobbled together, but there's not enough meat about the "Controversies" to make for a whole article. Perhaps a greatly reduced discussion about Hollywood demographics could be merged into Cinema of the United States. But, this is just a list of stuff people said. See |WP:Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:IINFO)

Comment: Straight forward 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: an accpetable article on this topic may well be possible, this is not it. Nor do I think an acceptable article could grow out of what is currently on the page without it being so fundamentally rewirtten that a redlink would be a better starting point than the current content. Despite the changes the article is still an |unbalanced |coatrack and I do not think that can be changed through normal editing. With this kind of article the |neutral point of view must be present from the start not something crowbarred in as the article develops
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE||WP:COATRACK||WP:NPOV)

Comment: If nothing else, you have to go in order: "Hollywood," then "Leadership of Hollywood," then "Leadership controversies in Hollywood," and only if all of that, then "Controversies related to this or that in Leadership of Hollywood."  (The same can be done via history of Hollywood, if that is seen to be the topic).  But starting such detailed articles on one aspect of controversy (if this is a mainstream controversy, which I'm not sure it is) creates a 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK)