Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anchor baby
Wikipedia |may not be a dictionary, but this term still deserves its entry. It passes , , EO and  (Though  is a connected issue, not policy). Also, the article is properly referenced and passes . The article has sources such as ''The New York Times'' and the ''Chicago Tribune'', so even if you wanted to call it a neologism, you still couldn't deny that it has secondary, encyclopedic sources to back up its notability. Not to mention the relevance of the term Anchor baby in article such as Illegal immigration, Wetback (slur), Birthright citizenship in the United States of America, and Immigration reduction to Special:WhatLinksHere/Anchor baby|name a few
— [[User talk:Leonard^Bloom|Leonard]][[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Leonard^Bloom|(Bloom)]], 17:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOT||WP:N||WP:DICTIONARY||WP:NEO||WP:WORD||WP:WORD||WP:V (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)