Deletion of Letter of British Jews on 60th anniversary of Israel

Comment: per  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyright violations (WP:COPYVIO||WP:NOTABILITY)

Comment: per  and .  Time will tell if this letter will be as important as J'accuse (letter) or A Common Word Between Us and You.  But at this point in time this Letter is not important and does not deserve its own article on Wikipedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSOAPBOX||WP:NOTABILITY)

Comment: on deletion but if kept, '''move''' to We're Not Celebrating Israel's Anniversary, the title under which the letter was published. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/30/israelandthepalestinians Epson has already responded to SelfEvidentTruths' points but I have an additional comment on point 2. The idea that "the letter is surprising and newsworthy in that it runs contrary to the official Israeli line that the State of Israel somehow represents all Jews worldwide, and that all Jews are proud (or should be proud) of what it's doing today and what it did in the past" makes it seem that Jews who are critical of Israel are normally unheard of and thus the open letter is something nobody would have expected. This is hard to believe given that :Category:Jewish anti-occupation groups has 22 entries (including this article). As to point 3, "it's signed by more than 100 prominent, well-known Jews who have achieved significant accompolishments and are public personalities" is belied by the fact that so many of the signatories are not actually that prominent or well-known. In fact, for some of them, a large number of their Google hits seem to come from their association with this letter. Finally, the article may purport to be "balanced and neutral" but the article seems to give |undue weight to the letter by quoting from it, then reprinting the entire letter, then reprinting the entire list of signatories
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:UNDUE)

Comment: copyvio removed, but nonetheless,  and NN letter to the editor by self-righteous ignorants not a representative cross-section or a significant/notable organization. May they one day realize the error of their ways. Don't even think worth a mention anywhere else. The 60th anniversary is also not notable event, no where as significant as the 50th anniversary (anyone remember it?). Just as notable as George W Bush speech to the knesset
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: Because it fails , , , and , therefore it goes against wikipedias policies
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY||WP:OR||WP:NOTSOAPBOX||WP:COPYVIO)

Comment: at least two users, Al Ameer son, and SJP, were asked to vote keep here as well as gather up other users to vote keep in clear violation of  by SelfEvidentTruths http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAl_Ameer_son&diff=215290948&oldid=214694414 here and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ASJP&diff=215284292&oldid=207782621 here. Now neither of those users have voted here yet, but nonetheless, I would not be surprised if others were canvassed as well
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Canvassing (WP:CANVAS)

Comment: Please. This is a letter to the editor that got a little notice elsewhere. It'll be forgotten in a month if it hasn't been already (except on this page). It apparently only attracted notice in an online newspaper, and #NEWS|Wikipedia is not news
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: It received significant press outside of just the placement of the letter itself, as a google news search can demonstrate. The government of Israel made an official response to it. The entire news cycle with respect to the issue may not have even completely played out yet. The  issues are easily resolved short of deleting. There's definitely enough here for at least a stub article. Let's look at it in another 6 months or a year and we'll have a better perspective on whether it is worth keeping or not
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Copyright violations (WP:COPYVIO)