Deletion of New relationship energy (2nd nomination)

Comment: It reads like original research, but there seem to be a number of sources that report that this term is actually real. Perhaps it needs to be rewritten to make it more clear who coined this term, who uses and accepts this term, and what others think of the term so as to make it |non-biased
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: Having a look at the google news archive and google book results, there could be a small claim made for notability, but only as a neologism. They all document the term in more or less an anecdotal sense. There's no scientific or clinical definition of it established. This is evident  by the large amount of |original research in the "Related terms" section of the article comparing NRE to established language and concepts like limerence, puppy love and honeymoon. The only way this article could be written as anything another other than  is if it was just a list of anecdotes describing the subjective feelings described as "New Relationship Energy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:OR)

Comment: as a |neologism.  Could be redirected, but infatuation and limerence would seem a bit |original research.  Google scholar turns up "new relationship energy" http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=jyq&q=%22new%20relationship%20energy%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws 10 hits, several of which are unrelated to polyamory and I don't see any discussions, just mentions.  Straight-up google turns up http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=jyq&q=%22new+relationship+energy%22&btnG=Search&meta= 4K with wikipedia at the top - never a good sign
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO||WP:OR)