Deletion of Narcissistic abuse (2nd nomination)

Comment: Given the topic is related to medicine, and , it would be good to weight the arguments above through the prism of the expertise of the person giving them. For the record, I don't have background in medicine sufficien to think my opinion about this topic has much merit, although through the prism of expert Wikipedian and scholar in other fields I'll note that Google Scholar does have some hits for this term. But whether they are reliable or quacky I am not sure. Not a single journal article I see in GSCholar appears to be widely cited, or comes from a journal a relative outsider like me would recognize (Lancet, etc.). My current view is that the topic is very  in the current medical studies, and/or is a fork of what is better known as the narcissistic personality disorder (a term that is much more widely used in scholarly literature), but I am not going to put my head on the block for this claim
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:MEDRS||WP:FRINGE)

Comment: Nominations should not be made as proxies for new editors as the proper process of  is not done and valid reasons for deletion are not stated, so that there is no case to answer.  This faux nomination is especially vexatious as the topic has already been at AfD before, when the result was '''Keep'''.  The topic is also highly notable as there are numerous books written specifically about it – see links above.  What the topic clearly needs is some competent and expert editing per  and .  Perhaps
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:ATD||WP:IMPERFECT)