Deletion of Intelligent falling

Comment: after some thought. TL;DR: the problem is ''reliable sources'' that establish notability, "reliability" is dependent on what the source is supposed to support, and sourcing is adequate for notability in consideration of 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:WHYN)

Comment: While perhaps when originally tagged (Nov 2014), there were limited secondary sources (outside the original satirical Onion piece), that may no longer be the case. The limits and applicability of a  notwithstanding, there would seem to be some use of the term outside the primary source in the period since the original tag was added. (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Intelligent%20falling%22&tbs=qdr%3Ay&rct=j#q=%22Intelligent+falling%22&tbs=qdr:y&start=30 search
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Search engine test (WP:GOOGLETEST)

Comment: The term does not appear to have significant coverage and only passing mention as satire compared to something like flying spaghetti monster. This would appear to be covered enough for content about a fringe subject per , but not for a standalone article at this time unless it gets more coverage
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:PARITY)