Deletion of Antisemitic incidents alleged to be related to the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict

Comment: The article meets  standards
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: I looked over the page and although there are many references, it has a resounding feel of not just original research, but the above mentioned content forking concerns me as well. Maybe if the page were yanked, reformatted and reposted with a new name, instead of this one, and less of a tone considered to be |original research, it would be fine
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: obviously notable material which needs to be split from the reactions page per . (N)POV has absolutely nothing to do with it, and there's nothing inherently POV about either the article's title or its content
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SIZE)

Comment: per . Kudos to ChesD for revamping the article. Any confusion between valid political criticism and antisemitism should be resolved at the article's talk page, not at afd.  2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict is already bursting at its seams. We should  encourage, not discourage, spinoffs
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The Heymann Standard (WP:HEY)

Comment: seems an acceptable spinoff article. The main conflict article is excessively long already, necessitating the creation of articles like this (see also, for instance, list of Qassam rocket attacks); I don't agree that it's a POV fork, as I don't think this article is particularly biased. It's undisputable that there did occur a number of antisemitic incidents related to the recent Gaza conflict; there is a danger of |original research here, in assuming the existence of links that didn't actually exist, but most of the examples here ''do'' appear to be specifically related to the Gaza conflict. A merge into the International Reaction article would be possible, but it doesn't strike me as absolutely necessary either
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: not every trend/news event deserves an article in Wikipedia. . maybe a move to Wikinews is fine
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:INDISCRIMINATE)

Comment: do not merge, anything with the words "alleged" in it's title is a clear |content fork, also I don't see it ever becoming neutral enough for a merge as well. Agree with JulesH
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)

Comment: CLOSING ADMIN: see my not below''') - I think this material is mostly relevant an encyclopedic, and presents facts that are unquestionable - so the material should not be deleted. I think the article has serious issues with  and possibly  - and needs a more balanced and impartial tone (ie It was named "Attacks against Jews", which is both POV (not all incidents listed are attacks - speech is hurtful and hateful but is not an attack as generally accepted) and bad English (We have a word for "hate against Jews" in English: "Antisemitic"; not using it its like saying "Killing one self" instead of "Suicide").  I disagree the nom is bad faith, but I think it is a mistaken one, and that an effort can be made with the material to bring it to encyclopedic quality
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:SYNTH)

Comment: per , also its 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK||WP:POV)