Talk:manwoman

See also Talk:man-woman. - -sche (discuss) 03:36, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

RFV discussion: July 2014–February 2015
Scannos constitute a large portion of the limited number of Google Books hits this gets. I am doubtful enough citations remain to attest all four of the entry's senses. (Some scannos are of "man-woman" in phrases like "the ideal man-woman relationship", but others are of the entirely ambiguous designations "man-woman" and "woman-man" which I comment on here.) - -sche (discuss) 05:13, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * needs citing as well, or else it's a case of plural unattested. Renard Migrant (talk) 11:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)


 * The only way I see this passing RFV is if we combine the senses into one very broad sense. Under that broad sense are three citations of manwoman; menwomen has a citation as well. Scannos make it hard to find more citations. - -sche (discuss) 02:43, 30 January 2015 (UTC)


 * RFV-failed. There were only three citations, and they used three rather disparate senses. Replaced with . - -sche (discuss) 21:17, 1 February 2015 (UTC)