I am in the process of posting a well-used but specified term on Wikipedia. The reviewers seem to be fighting the term. What do you think. Should we be able to introduce a term that is not in the dictionary?
Sure you should be able to, but you shouldn't count on widely accepted credibility using that term.
Unless you can cite a source, they're not going to be too happy about its inclusion.
Also ask yourself why you're trying to add it. Is it to further ones own agenda? If the reviewers are knocking it back, then accept the rejection and move on.
Wikipedia is meant to document our existing world. Sort of like the dictionary, or the encyclopedia. It's not a platform to launch spiffy new stuff.
Not that there's anything wrong with that - Wikipedia just isn't the place for it.
I coined the term in a book I wrote in 1999. Since then the term is widely used. However, it is often misused due to the misunderstanding of the word gnostic. Google it on wikiedia if you would like to see it. There are many websites who now use it as I have taught thousands over the past years. Now, the term is watered down. I no longer need to take credit for the term. It is trademarketed by me. So, now I simply want to have the word understood.
Take a look if that kind of thing interests you.
I just read a piece on the new words added to "official" dictionaries this year. Some were very fluffy and fad-oriented. The internet is the place for new things. Each venue has its own rules, but considering the venue you mentioned lets folks edit and write false comments all the time I have no idea why they would ban your input.
What is the word?

working