Deletion of Hater (Internet)

Comment: This is pretty clearly a  of internet troll, leveraged from a .  As noted above, the arguments that attempt to indicate that there is a concept here distinct from that of the troll article are all based on  built out , and ''not'' based on any kind of coverage (to say nothing of the kind of ''significant'' coverage we would need to justify an article here) within any particular eliable source.  I welcome the authors of this content to contribute some of the content here to the troll article or elsewhere, but this just does not pass muster for policies on independent notability/fork/neologism issues
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK||WP:NEOLOGISM||WP:SYNTHESIS||WP:R||WP:original research)

Comment: Basically #DICT: but as
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: This article is essentially a drawn out |dictionary definition, and the concept itself is, as was stated by the nominator, too abstract to be properly presented in an encyclopedia. What constitutes "hatred" in a public forum is based on opinion, not fact, and therefore, the topic cannot be covered without some sort of |POV. Additionally, there is some blatant |original research in this article (especially in the "Cause of a hater's actions" section), and some of the content is mind bogglingly inept. (e.g. Why is an episode of Cheers from 1989 referenced in an article about an internet term?) All signs point to "delete": if anything, a redirect to Wiktionary may be appropriate
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:DICTDEF||WP:POV||WP:NOR)