Deletion of Allegations of state terrorism by Israel

Comment: It is an obvious POV fork. Quoting a personal essay () in order to support keeping the article, while in the same breath denouncing "Delete" arguments as not being supported by Wikipedia policy is amusing, but not very convincing
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: per nominator. This non-descript stub is just out to make mischief based on the militantly Islamic rantings of Turkey's PM and Dictator for life Hugo Chavez of all people. This is also a violation of  &  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTSOAPBOX||WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND||WP:NPOV)

Comment: This will definitely be a test of whether WP is based on a vote count or discussion merit. The above assertions are all erroneous citations of WP guidelines ("Seems like "), erroneous statements about WP policy ("you can't just list every..." X "...and call it an article" -au contraire) or merely in error("the article never got expanded enough") -the article has been updated in 2009, so it has obviously not been abandoned), or dittoing ("for same reasons", "per Y and Z") All three are present in Malik and Nudve's statements
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: Per Carlos, this is craptastic. Poorly wirtten and referenced, non-notable, POV ... if not for that, I would love to have voted keep
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK)