Deletion of India and state sponsored terrorism

Comment: per  and . Agree with the nominator and others. Almost everything in this article is  "According to Pakistan..." or alleged by Pakistan. The whole article is a POV and sourced to 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTHESIS||WP:SOAPBOX||WP:SELFPUBLISH)

Comment: Nothing'' has been proven to be SPS, synthesis or OR in the article. This topic is highly notable and includes statements by heads of state (Presidents, Prime Ministers), politicians, academics on the issue. There are a variety of sources available that make this topic important, the ones currently used on the article are just a tip of the iceberg. This deletion discussion is simply a result of  and a poor attempt to whitewash content when users couldn't get to enforce their POV on the article. The only thing that is shameless here is this AFD being initiated by a user who has a clear conflict of interest
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: Being a crystal clear violation of , , , and a case of cherry picking, this article seems to be a case of . The only argument the article creator has presented in , which is, like always, eligible to be discounted. Like most other similar articles in this topic, the purpose of the article is evidently to advance a position. The article is full of s, and what makes it worse is that they have been used to support highly controversial allegations
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:SOAP||WP:SYNTH||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:WAX||WP:SPS)

Comment: Per  and .Violates NPOV and as AshLin already said, shows allegations as facts
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:SOAP)

Comment: There are abundant of |reliable sources which discuss this subject (http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=MDXWDJocZBgC&pg=PA263#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=l5tXm1V8lTIC&pg=PA136#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?ei=pNNyT5-nIKPi4QSR7_i9Dw&id=r76-boA981IC&pg=PA63#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=sOTZqI5zREoC&pg=PA149#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=Zaby0jJdO9YC&pg=PA140#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=UIBzCC0c2McC&pg=PA615#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=DOIE6IN1JMMC&pg=PA127#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=Sb1ryB8CVvIC&pg=PA552#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=3vo17OBuOyQC&pg=PA138#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=zMSLsSVKxNMC&pg=PA163#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=3diOl6PP-egC&pg=PA118#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books/about/Working_with_Zia.html?id=26TjAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=czSm7cmhgA0C&pg=PA206#v=onepage&q&f=false, http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=UevYmtOtgGYC&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=false).i.e. India's support to militant groups involved in violence and terrorism related activities. Besides continued editing of the article after it was nominated for deletion just endorses that it is a content issue, which obviously cannot be resolved by deletion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: per  and . The article contains cherry picked Quotes and allegations many of them from   and questionable sources and merged together with  for obvious anti-India POV pushing. Moreover statements of allegations are being pushed as proof
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP||WP:FORK||WP:SPS||WP:SYNTHESIS)

Comment: per ,  and . Agree with AshLin, Animesh and others that the article cannot just be about allegations by Pakistan
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:SYNTH||WP:SOAP)

Comment: This topic/article has received significant coverage by secondary |reliable sources furthermore the topic is highly |notable I concur with above these deletes are |I DONT LIKE IT and pov pushing by certain Indian editorsSpecial:Contributions/141.241.13.254|141.241.13.254
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NOTE||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: It is a good example of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: The article is on a |notable subject with |reliable sources supporting it. I don't see a reason to delete it. Content disputes are not resolved through deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:RS)

Comment: merely a list of allegations by Pakistan. Not at all encyclopedia-type. Per   and , , and , it is a clear delete
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP||WP:FORK||WP:SYNTH||WP:SPA)

Comment: shamelessly violates  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:SOAP||WP:FORK)

Comment: topic has received significant coverage by secondary |reliable sources & topic is highly |notable... i don't see any legitimate concerns to delete it, this nomination sounds a lot like |I DONT LIKE IT to me
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:NOTE||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)