Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of state terrorism by the United States
I can understand the frustrations many editors have had with this article, and I have them also. And I think  that there are emotional involvements here, as this is a sensitive subject, as well as a politicized and controversial one. But to nominate an article for deletion because of content disputes is against policy, per , in which it says: ''Disputes over page content are not dealt with by deleting the page.''  Therefore the effect of this nomination is disruptive, especially following on seven AfDs in which the article was kept, and does not help the article. As I said before, to argue for deletion looks like a case of Ben Tre|destroying the village to save it.  No one disputes that the subject is notable, and there are loads of |reliable sources for |notability and |verifiability, about 238 references when the article was much longer.  If there are  issues, or any of the other issues raised in the nomination, which I don't see, then consensus edit them, per policy, rather than delete.  The only serious issue I see is that it's a |battleground with edit wars preventing the article from being stabilized and improved
— User:Becksguy, 19:29, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:DP||WP:RS||WP:N||WP:V||WP:POV||WP:BATTLEGROUND (Wikipedia:Deletion policy)