Deletion of Radical planning

Comment: I'm not really familiar with urban planning / urban theory concept at all, so my ability to evaluate sources in the content field is poor. That said, Google Scholar returns a ''lot'' of hits on the topic, some of which (https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/32351608/Insurgent_planning_Miraftab.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1526394724&Signature=3bcd3wmun7Tnn%2FkZNfzxlETvgIE%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DInsurgent_Planning_Situating_Radical_Pla.pdf here, for example pdf link not so much working, but http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1473095208099297 this article) seem to be quite independent of the originators of the term. Radical planning also appears to have been discussed https://books.google.com/books?id=Bwc1DQAAQBAJ&pg=PA715 here, in ''The Oxford Handbook of Urban Planning''. I don't doubt that our current article has undue weight problems (and, in general, is just a lousy little stub). But I don't think this is a  topic at all; fringe theories don't get section-level coverage in Oxford University Press books
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)