Deletion of Criticism of Israel

Comment: Put individual criticisms into articles where they are in context, so that for example arguments against Israel's settlement policies are in context with Israel's position supporting those policies. Create a list article Controversies about Israel to link to those criticism sections. Note that a list article can have introductory material to clarify what is in or out of it, but I believe doing it this way will create less of a . Also, we will avoid future problems of . Note, I changed my !vote, which was "Delete" above
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:BATTLEGROUND||WP:FORK)

Comment: to Anti-Zionism, simply because ''this'' article is pretty one-sided and violates . BTW, Brewcrewer, you don't have to wikilink to Strawman for every single one of your comments. '''Erpert
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: WP:POVFORK from the already povforked  Anti-Zionism. Don't need another  for everyone to hang their preferred antisemitism anti-israel, anti-zionism, etc. Notice of course that we don't have Criticism of Saudi Arabia, Criticism of Sudan, Criticism of South Africa, Criticism of Germany, etc
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)

Comment: The Anti-Zionism article is a mess as it includs a vast amount of material that should be in this article - the clearest examples are the 6 references to "criticism of Israel" within the AZ article.  Anti-Zionism is about the ideology supporting the existence of the country, this is about the criticism the country has had to face in relation to policy decisions. This criticism is highly notable - as shown by ghits and all the facts shown on the page such as disproportionate UN criticism, PR against criticism a big political focus within Israel, innumerable  books and media articles written on the topic. The facts that other countries do not have such articles, that the article doesn't already exist, or that the article 'could' be used for advocacy are not valid arguments. WP has "Criticism of" articles for the three major Abrahamic religions - editors have worked hard and these have not become coatracks. This topic is highly notable and is needed in order to house a lot of information incorrectly placed within Anti-Zionism
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: This is a very clear case of a POV fork, created following Talk:Israel#International_Criticism|this discussion where a majority of editors felt that a similarly-titled article section was inappropriate. There does not appear to be any purpose to this article other than to give a different slant on information that is either contained or could be contained in the other two articles on the same topic (if you don't feel that this is the case, then please give an example of the type of information you think needs this article to exist). On top of which, the article would be an obvious drama-magnet. Keep votes here seem to be based simply on  or on the argument that related articles are not good enough but for some reason can't be improved, which seems tanatamount to saying that you want to a new space to push a POV that has not so far prevailed elsewhere. Sincerely hope that a closing admin will see through this
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ITEXISTS)