Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Undulatus asperatus
This topic is the subject of multiple in-depth and high profile coverage in the general press.  does not apply: Wikipedia is not needed to promote this neologism because it has not just been used but explained in the media.  does not apply because even in the event that this type of cloud formation is not accepted in the International Cloud Atlas, it will of course still be used, although possibly as a subcategory of one of the other cloud formations.  makes no sense for something that has been reported so widely (National Geographic, New York Times, USA Today, Guardian, Toronto Star, MSNBC, CBS News, Daily Mail), and I am not convinced there are any neutrality issues in the first place ( is a section of 
— NONE, NONE
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NEOLOGISM||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:UNDUE||WP:NPOV (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)