Deletion of Love Jihad

Comment: as a well-cited and growing phenomena that has received significant coverage in reliable sources. With respects to Zencv... and while not meaning to |wax... Yes, Wikipedia might properly look askance at Flying saucer|overhyped and Loch Ness Monster|sensationalized subjects or subjects whose existance is Bigfoot|alleged. But real or not, once  is met with coverage in reliable sources, the inclusion standards have been met.  Dispite any editor's personal feelings about the subject itself, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is |verifiability, not truth
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:WAX||WP:GNG||WP:V)