Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Racism and Zionism

Vote was for Delete? What???


 * 1- Keep - Speedy at that,may investigate and expewith reliable sources, it mwhen
 * 2- Keep - While this articlework to it. Also, I see no r
 * 3- Keep a good general asubjects, it needs more caconflicts and pretending th2008
 * 4- Keep Subject matter is clearly notable, as evidenced by the many sources cited.
 * 5- Keep That an article isto have overlooked. The adisregard the fact that thecoverage.
 * 6- Keep Per DGG's argumAugust 2008 (UTC)
 * 7- Keep This article's subresolution which maintainecontinued since 1991. It islands.
 * 8- Keep, but needs work a(UTC)
 * 9- Keep, but needs major
 * 10- Keep, The topic is clesquareed away Advocate
 * 11 -Keep - It's well-sourcedisagree with the allegatioclean it up. I'm busy with this article.


 * 1- Strong Delete - This athe apartheid analogy -- Asame subject...created toreflect the WP
 * 2- Weak delete A good think the current article iscreate a good article with01:50, 1
 * 3- Delete This isnt' an aembarassment to Wikiped
 * 4- Delete per Malik Shab
 * 5 - Delete The fact that deleted; clearly an article make it neutral. However,against "and".
 * 6- Delete the article's titAugust 2008 (UTC)
 * 7 - Strong Delete per Tu
 * 8 - Delete as the article 2008 (UTC)
 * 9 - Delete This is a truly
 * 10 - Delete Of no acade