Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qing conquest theory
WP:NEOLOGISM says, "In a few cases, there will be notable topics which are well-documented in |reliable sources, but for which no accepted short-hand term exists. It can be tempting to employ a neologism in such a case. Instead, it is preferable to use a title that is a descriptive phrase in plain English if possible, even if this makes for a somewhat long or awkward title." This is one of these cases that calls for a descriptive phrase-title, although I don't think promoting a neologism was article creator's intent; the title is in lowercase, so it seems like a terse try at a descriptive title that unfortunately looks like a neologism. The theory that this article describes is definitely attested to in multiple reliable sources, so the title just needs rejiggering, which happens at the talk page and not AfD
— User:Quigley, 02:48, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)