::::::::It's reliable by virtue of the publisher's reliability, presentation at a symposium, etc. You're missing the point that whether or not the term is in widespread use is irrelevant. WP:NEO requires treatment in reliable, secondary sources, not widespread usage. You're also misstating WP:CIRCULAR: a passing reference to Wikipedia is not the same as presenting material originating from Wikipedia. In short, you're arguing against a source (which, really, you should take to WP:RSN), while at the same time using it to support your synthetic argument that anyone using the word is engaged in a political attack. That's beyond inconsistent; it defies logic.  
 ::::::::What's more, no one's saying that "the word (just) means 'fecal matter'". You just made that up. It's clear that you're constructing a strawman argument just so that you can dismiss me as dishonest. In point of fact, the word means "the frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that sometimes accompanies anal sex," and, yes, it was originally conceived of as a political attack. But the sources show that it is now more than that: it has since become a full-fledged, bona-fide neologism that meets every Wikipedia criterion for a stand-alone article with a concise, descriptive name. Your consistent misrepresentation of this article's sources and Wikipedia's policies is what's truly dishonest here.