Deletion of Theistic rationalism

Comment: I've expanded the article, added references, and formatted it appropriately. It could still stand to be expanded further, as it remains a stub, but I believe it now meets our requirements for inclusion. The concern over  has been addressed with the citation of two books on theology which discuss Theistic rationalism specifically, as well as two other articles. Theistic rationalism now meets our requirements of |verifiability, it is written in a |neutral manner, and it does not contain any |original research (all claims are |reliably sourced). Check, check, and check: keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:VERIFY||WP:NPOV||WP:OR||WP:RS)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO)

Comment: Without even reading the article, I can picture what the concept is. As a matter of fact, now that I've heard the term, I might use it to refer to my own beliefs, but in Wikipedia terms that would be |OR. The real question is, are there enough people talking about theistic rationalism to warrant an article? Is there even a standardized definition for that? Right now, I have to say no, but I have no prejudice against a future recreation of the article should the theologians agree on a definition. As far as the article itself goes, it is too vague to stay. --Blanchardb
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)