Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ladder of opportunity


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   no consensus. –MuZemike 22:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Ladder of opportunity

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP is not a dictionary for Neologisms. Mattg82 (talk) 02:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Legis (talk - contribs) 03:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment If this phrase was something that was used throughout an election, then I can see some notability in that. But we'd need sources to document it. Compare other political catch phrases such as Thousand points of light. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - The article is unsourced at the moment, but references abound (a bunch of them at Google Archives). It was a central theme of Labor's 2004 election strategy and has passed into Australian political terminology, with many of the refs from recent years. There are also a multitude of references in which American presidents use the phrase, from Obama to Reagan to Wilson (more Google archives). The refs are almost invariably political in nature - it is clearly a political catchphrase, but not perhaps exclusive to the Australian Labor Party.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 23:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * (Conditional) Keep - Contingent upon expansion of the article with incorporation of sources cited by Yeti Hunter.--JayJasper (talk) 06:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Although having said that, I didn't spot any references that talk about the term, just ones that use it. It's original synthesis to add our interpretation of what exactly the phrase means or its political implications in the absence of a RS making such interpretation.--Yeti Hunter (talk) 10:20, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.