Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Innovation journalism
The term "innovation journalism" is mentioned by quite a few secondary sources.  I see 51,000 hits on google; between 100 and 200 on Google Books; and 341 on Google Scholar.  One writes "Lately, she has been a visiting scholar at the Innovation Journalism program at Stanford University, California. .." indicating the Standford University has some interest in this (as well as the European connections that are more predominant).  Granted this is a very recent field of study, and the term was only invented in  2004.  If the term were used only by blogs & children, maybe it would not meet notability requirements, but - to the contrary - it is used primarily by academic sources which are precisely the high-quality sources WP prefers.   Turning to conflict-of-interest issues:  the  guideline suggests that we should emphasize  sources ''other'' than those written by the originator of the term to help make the decision.  Google seems to indicate that the majority of the sources are not by the originator (see |secondary).   As for the content of the article:  the riginal research policy suggests that the sources used as a basis for the article should ''primarily'' be sources that are not by a founder/advocate of the field, but rather sources written by journalists or other academics that are more impartial
— User:Noleander, 13:11, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:PRIMARY||WP:SECONDARY||WP:O (Wikipedia:No original research)