Deletion of Croatophobia

Comment: Inexistant neologism going against  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:POINT)

Comment: If this is a notable phenomenon, ''the fact that no English word exists for it (yet) is not a deletion argument'', exactly because Wikipedia is |not a dictionary and does not write about words in the English language but about concepts and objects in the real world. If "Croatophobia" is real, or there are notable enough allegations that it is, the English Wikipedia should still be able to write about it using ''some title'', even if the only sources are in Croatian or other languages, and the entry has to borrow a foreign word to describe it (we do that all the time with, for instance, obscure theological concepts in Hinduism or Islam, that can only be described through borrowing words in Sanskrit or Arabic unknown to the average educated English-speaker). (I am still skeptical about this article from the point of view of the  policy, and not really prepared to recommend to keep it, but I think some of the deletion arguments are faulty
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:NOR)