Deletion of Lighthouse project

Comment: it's a stub with no reliable sources, so nothing really to keep. No prejudice against recreation with sources that show notability if they exist. BTW the above sources, though I don't have access to them all, don't appear to show notability. We would need evidence of some kind of in depth coverage of the concept, not just use of the term per . &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDICTIONARY)

Comment: Easily passes  and . The term is used in hundreds of published sources, including academic research in English and other languages. My university library has 115 peer reviewed English-language journal articles using the term (several of them with the term in the article title), over 200 non-peer reviewed journal articles, 588 newspaper articles, 14 conference proceedings, four books, and four academic reviews. In other words, the term is widely used and lots of verifiable sources exist. I can copy paste a selection of sources if asked, but frankly there are so many it seems implossible that  was followed
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SIGCOV||WP:BEFORE)