Talk:on the ladder

Deletion discussion

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

on the ladder

Looks SOP - on the ladder. Perhaps we need another sense of ladder. In fact, this probably isn't even SOP. --Type56op9 (talk) 11:53, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

In context it is an obvious metaphor. Ladder has a similar metaphorical use for "a progression". MWOnline has "a series of steps or stages by which someone moves up to a higher or better position" DCDuring TALK 14:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

"this probably isn't even SOP". Keep per nominator? Renard Migrant (talk) 16:20, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I disagree that in context it clearly refers to property ladder. I will edit to property ladder to fix the actual meaning. Renard Migrant (talk) 16:27, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm unfamiliar with the term property ladder, but I must confess I understand the previous definition ("A family's lifetime progress from cheaper to more expensive housing") better than the current one ("The hierarchy of owned housing"). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Any of the definitions (other than from WP or us) at “property ladder”, in OneLook Dictionary Search. would be an improvement. DCDuring TALK 23:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I concede that my definition isn't very good. Accurate, but hard to understand. Renard Migrant (talk) 11:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The previous definition is better in every way but one: it's not correct! It's not a progression or to do with a family, you can live on your own or with friends and be on the property ladder. It's not a progression because you can be on the property ladder without moving. Renard Migrant (talk) 12:53, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

For the term ladder to have been applied to home-ownership, obviously the idea of progress is required. Increasing wealth over one's working years is part of the story, but a large part of it is increasing household size which drives need at least as much as an individual's accumulation of things. To a large extent this is a notion promoted by the real-estate industry that they use to encourage the purchase of small homes. DCDuring TALK 14:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

• Keep: if the nom isn't sure if it's SOP or not, this RfD is a waste of time. Purplebackpack89 21:51, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
• Keep. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Kept, clear absence of consensus to delete. bd2412 T 17:31, 4 January 2015 (UTC)