Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bush Derangement Syndrome (6th nomination)
nomination has apparently neglected to include ; "findsources" demonstrates a wealth of available sources particularly in books and scholar.  It's strange to think that 5 previous deletion discussions have got it wrong, but never mind.  Apart from that, one might question the premise that it is a neologism; perhaps it's a real syndrome, in which case there's no question about  here
— User:Nomoskedasticity, 15:50, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)