Deletion of Palestinian Authority and the apartheid analogy

Comment: as yet another obvious POVFORK and violation of . I.Casaubon, the article's creator, really ought to be sanctioned for persisting with this pointless waste of everyone's time. He knows perfectly well what the problem with these misconceived articles is, so there is no excuse for creating more of them
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: WP:COATRACK is an essay. For the sake of argument, it also has not been shown. What POV is being hung here?  has not been shown. What two arguments in sources are being combined to make one argument in the article? As usual (true, dat), this is a policy regarding article content, not article subjects. Please see #REASON. Just once. It won't hurt, I promise. If you insist on not doing so, I can sum it up for you; Non-notability: RS, V, N; Redundancy: FORK; Disruption: (COPYVIO, SPAM, VANDAL). Nothing about PoV. That's because PoV can be written out of any piece of prose
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTHESIS||WP:DELETION)

Comment: yet another exercise in  obviously aimed at the Israel and the apartheid analogy article. The difference is that this article is sourced entirely to op-eds. Clearly fails , 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:V||WP:NOTE)

Comment: Clear example of eenerNeener over the Israel and the Apartheid Analogy article. Pointy original research. The difference between the systemic application of Israeli state power and the policies of therag-tag Palestinian authority seems obvious. This article is akin to something like Racism of American negro slaves attempting to be foisted to "make up" for an article on American slavery
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Poor sourcing, trivial mentions in blogs that are about as |pointy about name-dropping the a-bomb as the article creator is.  An editor who should be taken before  at this point. honestly
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT||WP:AE)