Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Contemporary persecution of non-Jews by Jews

Bias
It seems that most people who want the article deleted are Jews themselves and I did notice that the person in question who started the Deletion vote messaged other Jews to support him. That's funny. We can have articles on Holacaust and we can force info about polograms on articles about cities (example: Iaşi, but we can't have an article that depicts persecution made by Jews? I didn't know there were special rules for that kind of thing. The article offers references. What more do you want? --Candide, or Optimism 15:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Anittas, get your info straight, it's called a "pogrom", not a "pologram". Sebastian Kessel Talk 16:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of a polygram at the time. :p --Candide, or Optimism 16:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The reason this article is going to be deleted is not because of the veracity of the individual facts (though that is certainly debatable as well). It is because the very existence of an article that lumps these facts into one unit entitled "Persecution of non-Jews by Jews" is inappropriate, presenting such persecution as a recognized, substantiated historical trend, and is a blatant example of POV. DLand 16:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Which doesn't begin to address Candide's disturbing between-the-lines assertion that because Jews are opposing the article, it must be a good article. Of course we have articles on the Holocaust.  What respectable encyclopedia wouldn't?  Why would there not be mention of pogroms, for example, in Iaşi?  1/3 of the population of Iaşi was Jewish prior to the pogrom.  If 1/3 of the city were killed or deported today, would you similarly claim that including mention of it were unnecessary or somehow POV-pushing?  Or is it just not noteworthy if the people expelled or killed were Jews or maybe Gypsies?  Tom e rtalk  21:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)