Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination)
I suppose I was naive to hope this could be drawn to a quick resolution.  In response to Jay's statement, I should note that this particular controversy actually predates the creation of the Israeli apartheid page.  To the best of my knowledge, it began with the creation of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_Africa_under_apartheid&diff=7470152&oldid=7469259 this subsection of the "Apartheid in South Africa" article on 15 November 2004, which in turn led to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_Africa_under_apartheid&diff=next&oldid=7471238 this retitling less than an hour later.  This material was later spun off to "Apartheid Outside South Africa" (which, in turn, was later retitled as Allegations of Apartheid) via http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_Africa_under_apartheid&diff=18543138&oldid=18533411 this edit and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allegations_of_apartheid&oldid=18543621 this edit on 10 June 2005.  The section on Israel http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allegations_of_apartheid&diff=38693796&oldid=38679853 was removed in February 2006, and the article was http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allegations_of_apartheid&diff=38811319&oldid=38810889 reduced to a redirect later in the same day.  It was only expanded again on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Allegations_of_apartheid&diff=57017395&oldid=55678416 5 June 2006, when Jayjg tried to merge Israeli apartheid (phrase) into a larger article.  I'm quite aware that Jayjg has never accepted the legitimacy of an article on Israel and the apartheid analogy, but that matter now been resolved to the satisfaction of most parties, and Jay's suggestion that all of the "allegations" should be merged into a single article is a complete non-starter.  The partisan gamesmanship that's taken place on ''both sides'' of this debate has been one of Wikipedia's least edifying spectacles of the last few years, and I think it's time we all moved on from this.  Retitling Allegations of Israeli apartheid was a good start; deleting Allegations of apartheid would be a good next step.  I could add that past situations involving now-banned editors are not germane to the present discussion.  My question to Jay: how is this article ''not'' a violation of  and ?  Our standards have improved somewhat from 2005, after all
— User:CJCurrie, 05:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:SYNTH||WP:NOR (Wikipedia:No original research)