Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Machosexual (2nd nomination)
term has  articles where it is the primary topic. http://www.rd.com/content/openContent.do?contentId=28684http://travel.guardian.co.uk/article/2005/mar/27/observerescapesectionhttp://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2092965&page=1 (sorta) In fact, the Reader's Digest is so stodgy I think them devoting an article to a neologism is almost acceptance ''per se''. My major problem with the term is dicdef
— User:Dhartung, 05:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)