Deletion of Integrative Intelligence

Comment: The Forbes source -- which is from one of their online "contributors" -- seems to be for a different concept, from a different author, which happens to combine these two words. The article before us at this Afd is clearly a  to promote the new book by Sharda S. Nandram, which is also at Afd. At best what we have here is a  article to provide a foundation for promoting Nandram and his product
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK||WP:SYNTH)

Comment: this is not a thing in psychology - or anywhere else, for that matter. Although permitting it to remain would probably result in it becoming a  (franken)thing of our own making, as different editors added disconnected the sort of tidbits associable to a name this generic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: Oh. My. God. Is this discussion STILL going on? This is a poorly-defined, variously-defined, not-particularly-notable neologism (as several editors have repeatedly stated) and it frankly looks like a blatant attempt to |sell a book. Only {{ping|Fixuture}} seems to be keeping this discussion going. SURELY we have sufficient consensus now
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Advertising (WP:ADVERT)