Deletion of Micro-urban

Comment: because it doesn't really matter who coined the phrase first - for it to be considered notable enough for inclusion here, it needs to have been the subject of |significant coverage in multiple |reliable sources and I don't think it has yet. My other concern is that the article is entirely US-centric and this isn't Ameripedia. There are probably a dozen places in the UK that could be described as being "micro-urban" and dozens more in Europe. I can think of at least half-a-dozen in Australia that would meet the criteria. And that's kind of the point - if this were a term in widespread use, it would have been used in relation to a great many more places. At the moment, we don't even have reliable sources describing those places listed in the article as "mirco-urban". That list is simply |OR - based on someone's interpretation of the criteria and how it might apply. Most telling of all is the line from the people who claim to have coined the term
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:OR)

Comment: per Stalwart and .  "To support an article about a particular term or concept we must cite what reliable secondary sources, such as books and papers, say about the term or concept, not books and papers that use the term."  And it seems like local boosterism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO)