Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Niggerati
I wonder if the above user has thought to check  and . The fact that it has been used in an academic journal is neither here nor there: that would open the gates to literally thousands of  pieces of jargon, which are specifically excluded by wikipedia policy. Regardless of the notability and status of those who have used the term, it is still a neologism without widespread common use. If the above user is arguing that ''what the term describes'' is notable, they may have a case but the resulting article ought to be entitled '''Black intelligentsia''' or suchlike, and would have to differ massively from this one in terms of contents. Words in and of themselves, particularly slang terms, do not merit entries explaining their meaning or etymology (|Wikipedia is not a dictionary) and that is all this article does or is ever likely to do. Moreover, they seem to be suggesting that it is notable primarily because it was coined by a notable figure: that being the case, what does this page achieve that could not be achieved by briefly mentioning the term's coining on the Zora Neale Hurston page, especially since this page is never likely to progress beyond a stub
— NONE, NONE
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NEO||WP:NAD||WP:NAD (Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary)