Deletion of Cycle chic

Comment: to Bicycle#Social and historical aspects.  "Cycle chic" is not an established |neologism, and there's not enough coverage of bicycle fashion for an entire article
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO)

Comment: The nomination is almost nonsensical as the claim that the sources have nothing to do with this topic seems absurdly counterfactual.  For example, the http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/jun/26/healthandwellbeing.fitness Guardian article is clearly about the topic of "''cycling in fashionable everyday clothes''".  This topic is clearly notable and, while the article is far from perfect, it is our clear |policy to persevere.  Note also that the matter has been discussed previously at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bicycle chic.  And as for chic and List of chics, those articles seem quite poor, being far too concerned with |word usage than the underlying topic of fashion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:IMPERFECT||WP:DICDEF)