Deletion of Nasty woman

Comment: per , , , and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDICT||WP:NEO||WP:GNG||WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: as per : "Neologisms that are in wide use but for which there are no treatments in secondary sources are not yet ready for use and coverage in Wikipedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO)

Comment: This is a neologism. Wikipedia is not a dictionary.  and . Special:Contributions/188.238.17.66|188.238.17.66
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO||WP:NOTDICT)

Comment: and expand. The term is not new, so  and  does not apply. It's written about in http://www.jstor.org/stable/40548763  this 1994 journal on JSTOR (if you sign up you can read it on your virtual JSTOR bookshelf), in http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-006-9127-7 this 2006 journal (subscription required), it is discussed in relation to ''The Color Purple'' where Shug is described as "nasty woman" who has outsider status in the community (p. 85-86 in http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/34586359/LaGrone_K_Essays_on__THE_COLOR_PURPLE_2009.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1490469886&Signature=didKhR%2FgDW0x%2BoJYBuL2MDRNWr8%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DLaGrone_Kheven_Ed._ALICE_WALKERS_THE_COL.pdf#page=104 this 2009 book), another article about http://kata.petra.ac.id/index.php/ing/article/viewFile/15469/15461 Toni Morrison written in 2004, it is used to describe women who will not "take back" their husbands in http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8341.1972.tb02218.x/full this 1972 Journal, an https://books.google.com/books?id=W2aWb7wG0ysC&q=%22nasty+women%22&dq=%22nasty+women%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjBkZ-WpfLSAhVL8mMKHc-fClEQ6AEIHDAA entire 2003 book,  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2903214 The University of San Francisco Law Review has a 2017 article titled "Nasty Women and the Rule of Law." The term has clearly been used to describe a "certain type" women in the past and it received a strong push from Trump's use of it in the debate. The references in the article are strong, and it looks like the "original research" tag should be removed, since all statements are cited
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEO||WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: In wide use, sources are there for  and satisfies any questions about  and 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NEOLOGISM||WP:NOT)