Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Post-cult trauma
none of the sources are reliable, thus there is no proof this term is notable per . I found http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=%22Post-cult+trauma%22 zero Ghits on Google news, and http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Post-cult%20trauma%22&hl=en&ned=us&tab=nw#q=%22Post-cult+trauma%22+-wikipedia&hl=en&prmd=ivns&ei=35jeTb-IA-Py0gGIhoytCg&start=10&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=7e74ed319f8060e1&biw=1259&bih=823 piles of junk science at Google. The http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Post-cult+trauma%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C33&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 seven articles at Google scholar are very much a mixed bag - a draft of ''this article'', a link to answer.com, and a book on Google books, none of which are reliable sources. I don't see how this even passes  as  a fringe theory or pop psychology
— User:Bearian, 18:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:FRINGE (Wikipedia:Notability)