Deletion of Allegations of Israeli apartheid

Comment: Seems  well written and well sourced, referencing internationally renowned news sources. The potential to offend is not grounds for deletion, nor does it make an article unencyclopedic. #Wikipedia_is_not_censored|Wikipedia is not censored. The title of the article is "''Allegations'' of Israeli apartheid". The text of the article proves that such allegations are a reality and asserts their notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: those who vote to keep are violating of ot
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: Please see #Abuse of deletion process: '''"XfD(deletion) processes are not a way to complain or remove material that is personally disliked, whose perspective is against ones beliefs, or which is not yet presented neutrally. Using XfD as a "protest strategy" in an editorial or NPOV debate is generally an abuse of process and the article will usually be speedy kept."''' Without making a judgment on the worth of the article in question, Haham hanuka's nomination is a clear abuse of process. I note also that Haham hanuka has just recently been blocked for a week for another abuse of process on AfD and has a long history of blocks for 3RR and revert warring (see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Haham_hanuka). I've asked for this deletion vote to be closed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DEL)

Comment: POV is not grounds for deletion. POV  is correctable through judicious editing and collaboration-- the hallmark of Wikipedia at its best. As to purported inaccuracy, the benchmark is |Verifiability and not whether or not one agrees with the information presented. The article is large enough to stand on its own and would overly expand other articles. Does not violate . WP is ''not a paper encyclopedia and can thus accommodate items that would not fit in one.'' The article is about an (alleged) phenomenon and controversial subject that needs to be treated evenhandedly without censorship based on politics. Any "propaganda" needs to be countered with verifiable information that tells the other side of the story
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NOT)

Comment: POV title, and it only gets worse. Someone needs to read #Article_title
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (WP:WTA)