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 redirect to Conservative. BJ^Talk 04:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ultra-Conservative (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

While used too much to likely be under WP:NEO, it doesn't have a singular definition. At best, it would be a wikitionary entry, not an encyclopedia article. As it is, it is purely original research. PHARMBOY (TALK) 20:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Conservative. Ultra-conservative (with a lowercase c) already does. I'm not 100% on it being a neologism, but either way Ultra-liberal and Ultra-Liberal both don't have articles. Bsimmons666 (talk) 21:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Judgmental. Who decides how far right is ultra? Not wikipedia materialSwimmer1207 (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment As the nom, I have no problem with turning it into a redirect after (or instead of) delete. Because it is a political term and this is an election year, and the term is used to mean 100 different things, AFD seemed to be the best way to build concensus on it. PHARMBOY (TALK) 22:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and borderline G10. Nothing more than a dictionary definition for one (see WP:DICDEF). It seems to be soapboxing as well as has huge potential for original research, provided this article would be expanded; that is, what exactly makes a conservative ultra-conservative? MuZemike (talk) 22:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Conservative as stated above. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 11:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per Swimmer1207. At very least a redirect to Conservative. --Jza84 |  Talk  17:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails the WP:NOR smell test. As stated above, it's good enough for a dictionary article--not an encyclopedia article. If a Conservative is far enough right to be considered fascist, that label should apply. If it does not apply, "ultra" isn't a fitting modifier. A redirect might be a bit close to G10 in and of itself. CorpITGuy (talk) 18:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about Überconservative, as in being more conservative than Ultraconservative, but a tad less than Fascist? ;) PHARMBOY (TALK) 19:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ha!  :) CorpITGuy (talk) 23:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I just found out (by accident) that Ultraconservative (not this article, Ultra-conservative) is a redirect. I would say the fate of one should be the other, regardless. PHARMBOY (TALK) 19:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.