Deletion of Monsanto's Law

Comment: As above,  article of unclear notability, lacking significant coverage in independent sources for of any of the several uses of the term used in the article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEOLOGISM)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEOLOGISM)

Comment: on account of the subject entirely lacking |notability outside one single OTPRIMARY|primary source, the corporation's 1997 annual report, which is not available online any more. (We learn of its content through secondary sources.) If the neologism had caught on, it'd have been acceptable. But |it hasn't so it's not
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:NOTPRIMARY||WP:V)

Comment: as PRODer. I went through the sources, and there's only tangential mention as a . The main one was internal company-speak within the company about mirroring Moore's Law that hasn't got significant coverage, especially since that was back in 1997. The other part of the mishmash was from http://ceccam.org/node/612 this source about a nickname for a Mexican law that doesn't appear to have any standing over time. It's basically been a string of words a rare source uses rather than a concrete topic, so I don't see any use for a redirect anywhere either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEOLOGISM)