Deletion of Anti-elitism

Comment: per  - lack of "reliable secondary sources such as books and papers about the term—not books and papers that use the term
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO)

Comment: The article has no sources and is |unverifiable and appears to all be |original research. It contains no |reliable secondary sources. The article should be deleted. If someone recreates it at a later time and writes from |reliable sources, so be it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NOR||WP:NEO||WP:RS)

Comment: Articles should be written FROM |sources. The person writing an article should be looking at a source and writing FROM that source. Wikipedia is |not a place for unpublished facts, arguments, concepts, statements, or theories. I think it is wrong to write something and ask others to research a topic for you. Wikipedia is not here to do your homework for you. The burden of evidence lies with the WRITER, not the READER. If the writer of the material is too lazy to research a topic themselves and cite their sources, why should the reader have to make up for it? The fact is that Wikipedia articles can start rumors and they can snowball. Here's a post on kuro5hin by Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia and founder of Citizendium (or someone using his name) http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/12/30/142458/25, about anti-elitism on Wikipedia -- although I don't think kuro5hin is a reliable source; it probably counts as a self-published source
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NOR)