Deletion of Economic history of the Jews

Comment: Extremely well-sourced and passes  with no trouble.  I suggest some editors !voting delete actually read some of the article before going with a gut reaction, a reaction to which I am sympathetic in theory, but which is not borne out by the contents of the article.  There is plenty of material in it that follows  policy just fine
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NPOV)

Comment: The list of reliable sources at the top of this AfD clearly shows that the topic is discrete and notable and is not, in and of itself, a synthesis.  From what the sources appear to be saying, the relationship between Jews and their community economies appears to be a significant part of that people's history.  If I wanted to learn more about the topic, Wikipedia would be one of the fist places I would look.  If the article has POV problems, that is not the fault of the topic, but of the editors who have been involved with it.  I suggest that interested editors, perhaps including WP:ISRAEL, put the article on their to do list for improvement.  With the large amount of quality sources available, there is no reason why this article couldn't become a eatured Article|Featured Article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Non-free content (WP:F)

Comment: We all played this game with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judaism and violence and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judaism and bus stops.  Are articles of this type / or not?  This AfD just seems to be a higher stakes rehashing of the question
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH||WP:OR)

Comment: Jewish history is too large a topic to be complaining abut forks.  This article is 129K and so should be split down further rather than merged.  Also, it is our policy that |Wikipedia is not censored
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CENSOR)

Comment: It is a dumb, ugly, and racist lie, but "Jews control the money" is quote a notable one.  "Delete because it isn't true" is, quite frankly, a rather asinine reason to get rid of an article, not to mention being a violation of a |very basic Wikipedia policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: Per #REASON . Alternatively, redirect to Jewish history
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL||WP:POVFORK)

Comment: per low it up and start over.  It reads more like a blog post than a neutral article.  Interesting in places, but mountains of synth and opinion.  Many free blog hosting sites exist.  Wikipedia is not one of them.  If a new article is written with the same title, then after the new article has reached a reasonable state of completion (not while its main development is still going on), maybe the history of the old article can be restored.  Special:Contributions/75.57.242.120|75.57.242.120
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B)

Comment: I have sampled an Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Noleander/Evidence#Misrepresentation_of_sources_and_failure_to_use_existing_principal_sources_with_due_weight|alleged improper use of antisemitic sources in this article, which was Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Noleander/Evidence#Sombart|presented to ArbCom. Based on that, I don't think the article is so out line with NPOV as to require deletion, and the question of / does not hold water. Plenty of es discuss the topic, and plenty of wp:secondary ones provide commentary; a fair attempt has been made to use them. There is definitely room for improvement though
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYNTH||WP:RS)

Comment: per Maunas. Boatloads of  and some . If anything is salvageable, merge it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH||WP:OR)

Comment: as nominated. This is a content fork designed to push a particularly unpleasant POV. There are also issues relating to |synthesis. Whilst this subject may have potential with respect to notability, it will not be found in this version
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: per Folantin et al. The article is little more than a coatrack and an example of |original research by synthesis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: because '''1.''' it's a violation of  of History of the Jews. '''2.''' What next? Sociological history of the Jews, Anthropological history of the Jews, Psychological history of the Jews, etc etc etc just because someone has written a few books, not everything is worthy to be included in a respectable encyclopedia. '''3.''' A lot of the stuff in this article is fallacious and pure . '''4.''' This article allows antisemitism to ooze in, in violation of . No one seems to be bothered to write about the Economic history of the Christians, or Economic history of the Muslims, or Economic history of the Hindus, or Economic history of the Buddhists, or Economic history of the atheists, or Economic history of Native Americans, or Economic history of the Africans etc etc etc, so why the Jews all of a sudden? ''Mein Kampf'' and ''Das Kapital'' have plenty to say about so-called "Jewish economics" but they should not be the background inspirations for such articles. '''5.''' For legitimate areas that revolve around ''countries'' see :Category:Economic history. Thank you
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CONTENTFORKING||WP:OR||WP:SOAPBOX)