Deletion of Bromance (2nd nomination)

Comment: as it's possible the article is a  and per Jbeyerl
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)

Comment: to male bonding or some other appropriate article. The notability of the term itself (as opposed to the broad concept) is a red herring and covered by  - I'd have said this was a better candidate for Wiktionary except that the nomination points out it's already there. No need for it here, just pointless duplication of other topics
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)

Comment: While everything's sourced well, that hides the fact that there's very little here that goes beyond the |dictionary definition and examples of the term
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)

Comment: Several editors above discuss this "term" and mention it "has attained broad usage" or that it has "received significant coverage". But WP articles are supposed to be about ''concepts'', not about ''terms''. As #Major differences|Wikipedia is not a dictionary says, in an encyclopedia, "Articles whose titles are different words for the same thing... should be merged". Of course, nuances in terminology should be treated in the merged article: "whore" and "prostitute" are synonyms and belong in the same article (Prostitution), but have different connotations, which are discussed in that article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)

Comment: well defined topic, well referenced article, appears to be more than a , I'm just not seeing any grounds for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:DICDEF)

Comment: The article barely contains anything except etymology and example usage, i.e. discussion about the ''word'', which should be in wikt:bromance, per . The rest, if not already covered by the current article on homosociality should be merged into that article. Original research trying to establish that ''bromance'' is a new phenomenon, not covered by pre-existing terminology, should be removed
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)