Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ladies who lunch

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 to delete. I don't believe WP:NEO applies to a phrase with a specific meaning that reliable sources establish to have been in use for decades, and to still be being used for the same meaning. Given the sourcing (please use it to improve the article, or even just to add citations to the article), the WP:NOR concern also fails to be persuasive. GRBerry 04:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ladies who lunch

Ladies who lunch (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

del. I am afraid it is a piece of original research about a phrase from play, song, and TV show. I failed to find any refefence that explains this phrase. In any case, the text in the body of the article is highly dubious. At best, this page may stay as a disambiguation for the song & TV show. Mukadderat 02:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - nn TV neologism. MER-C 08:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Agree with nominator Bec-Thorn-Berry 10:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, WP:OR --Shirahadasha 10:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nominator. JIP | Talk 17:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
• Comment The phrase "Ladies who lunch" goes back at least 60 years and was commonly used by everyone from Bennett Cerf to Letitia Baldridge. It predates the television show it's currently used on, and may very well predate network television in the US. The only problem is that someone would have to find back pages of the New York Times and other newspapers of the late 40s and 50s to find reliable sources from society columns and some such, and I don't know if anybody's going to bother. --Charlene 01:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Charlene. There is more than enough reference to this term right now in books and periodicals to be satisfactory for inclusion, like: Rotunda's GM leaving ladies who lunch for Bergdorf's in the San Francisco Chronicle, Ladies Who Lunch in the Port Folio Weekly, and especially Brewer's Famous Quotations By Nigel Rees, which clearly states the term is for "(mostly middle-aged married) women who have nothing else in their lives but to organize and take part in lunches for charity." --Howrealisreal 14:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Also, I disagree that the phrase is original research. Just because we may not hear the phrase these days, doesn't mean someone is making it up. --MatthewUND^(talk) 09:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep a common enough phrase (I used it last week). Probably should be merged somewhere, but there are still ladies who lunch (gnews search for ladies-who-lunch). References to the phenomenon don't quite run from A to Z, but C (for Cole Porter's Miss Otis regrets) to V (for Vita Sackville-West's All Passion Spent about a lady who doesn't want to lunch) is better than Katharine Hepburn's emotional range. Would need hard work, and care to avoid WP:OR, but there is an article in this. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I don't see how this article can ever grow past being a stub -- its been here a year and is still only a paragraph, TheMindsEye 01:22, 12 January 2007 (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.