Deletion of Presumptive nominee (2nd nomination)

Comment: Per Borock & David Gerard, the term is now well beyond a mere dictionary definition. It is a term https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=%22presumptive+nominee%22&oq=%22presumptive+nominee%22&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i53.2628.11216.0.13825.21.11.0.10.0.0.236.1629.0j10j1.11.0...0.0...1ac.1.VrYGCZjrCeY&safe=strict&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22presumptive+nominee%22&safe=strict&hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0 commonly used by https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=%22presumptive+nominee%22&oq=%22presumptive+nominee%22&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i53.2628.11216.0.13825.21.11.0.10.0.0.236.1629.0j10j1.11.0...0.0...1ac.1.VrYGCZjrCeY&safe=strict&gws_rd=ssl#q=%22presumptive+nominee%22&safe=strict&hl=en&gl=us&authuser=0&tbm=nws&tbs=ar:1 reliable media sources and in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Presumptive_nominee U.S. election related articles in Wikipedia, and easily passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: or '''Merge''' to a sensible target - The article not only runs into "" issues, but it's literally formatted as a dictionary entry. It has 3 sections: Definition 1, Definition 2, and References. From : "To support an article about a particular term or concept, we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term." That it's in dictionaries and thesauruses does not speak to this. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:DICDEF||WP:NEO)