Deletion of Androphilia and gynephilia

Comment: to Sexual orientation (of course).  "Androphilia" (the sexual attraction to men) and "gynephilia" (the sexual attraction to women) are both perfectly legitimate terms and are indeed used by RS's.  The ''combination'' of the terms, however, is , and the content is "sexual orientation."  By analogy, Acid and Base are pages, but Acid and Base is a redirect to Ph.  The cites Jokestress added are examples of ''uses'' of the individual words, which is not the issue.  ("Acid" and "base" are used by experts, but do not establish "acid and base" as a topic independent of Ph.)  Finally, Jokestress' edits also claim on that mainpage that I personally have been advocating for other terms, which is both demonstrably incorrect and a BLP violation, as I already indicated there
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: That's a weird article history:  Two-thirds of it has been repeatedly http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Androphilia_and_gynephilia&diff=440382702&oldid=440372538 removed on BLP grounds, and repeatedly restored, with the (claimed) BLP problems basically being brushed aside.  Doubtless the restoration is a strategically useful response to the threat of deletion, because, in practice, AFD almost never deletes articles that names a couple of dozen sources, even if the sources don't say anything significant—or even at all—about the subject (so few editors bother to find out what the sources actually say), but it might be worth looking at both of the versions.I have not formed an opinion on what we should do with this page; it will require spending some time with the sources, to see how much of this might be a string of tiny, passing mentions or sources substantiating tangential points vs the significant, in-depth, independent, secondary sources that GNG requires.  As a general point, however, I'd like to call the existence of roposed mergers to the attention of the nom:  Merge-and-redirect discussions do not need to take place at AFD
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Portal (WP:P)

Comment: Clearly meets the |guidelines for a standalone article, plenty of sources that address the subject in detail
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)