From Zorrin
The 'deep stall' theory came up because it seemed much more plausible that a professional crew couldn't get out of a stall rather than wouldn't even try to. Especially the media picked it up readily, because it sounds appropriately dangerous.
Now many use it as a synonym for "really bad stall", which unnecessarily confuses people. See Ian's question, "were they told of the possibility of deep stall?"
Uhm, no, it wasn't in the "locked-in" kind and yes, it's got wings so obviously it can stall...
It's a garden-variety stall, do we need a special name for it?
OK let's not get carried away with nomenclature so the question can be avoided.
Can you name another civil airliner where the pilot can effortlessly hold the aircraft in a stable stall from 35,000 ft to the surface?
Had the THS not been fully nose up, what would the behavior of the A330 have been even with continual full NU elevator? Would that behavior have made it more obvious that the aircraft was stalling?