Deletion of List of Israeli strikes and Palestinian casualties in Operation Protective Edge

Comment: as a  and the fact that Wikipedia is not a place for nationalist propaganda.  The existence of Israeli propaganda on Wikipedia |is not a free pass for the creation of Hamas propaganda
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: What I find truly disturbing is the difference between voting on this nomination and rticles for deletion/List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: The reasons are general and specific. In general, there is no need for "breaking news"  articles, which will be filled every minute with information's that may be or not be accurate. In this way Wikipedia could become a journal and not an encyclopedia. Specific reasons are, as stated above, this article fell short of  policy. Claims like "The forces in the conflict are Gaza-based militants using mainly home-made missiles, mainly Qassam rockets, most of which often hit open fields,  versus Israel's combined military forces, which are equipped with F-15 fighter jets, AH-64 Apache helicopters, Delilah missiles, IAI Heron-1 drones and Jericho II missiles.3The Israeli civilian population has, in addition, access to shelters, early-warning sirens and is defended by the Iron Dome missile detection defence system"  can be  seen as . Israeli shelters are not subject here. Also, Hamas does not use only home made rockets and according to many sources, they fire them indiscriminately on civilian targets. Symmetric claims on Palestinian side point out that Israelis are also hitting Palestinian civilian targets causing widespread casualties..Symmetric claims on opposite side have been made regarding alleged use of civilians as human shields and a lot of sources can be found on this issue as well. All of this claims can be properly sourced, depening how they are picked,  and as we do not need "the absolute truth"  sections, claims falling short of neutrality, should be dealt with equal standards. However as I said, first and foremost  we do not need a "breaking news" article and this article contrary to the article mentioned above is looking like that
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:SYNTH)

Comment: In the interest of balance against rticles for deletion/List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel and for WP equilibrium. It's not a POVFORK, well-sourced and neutral
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: In the interest of balance against rticles for deletion/List of Palestinian rocket attacks on Israel I say this page be renamed List of IDF attacks against Palestinians
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: a POV list, which shrieks a potential for . Also ''per
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTHESIS)