- 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 keep. MBisanz talk 02:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Common man (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
No content, no references, just a dicdef & list `'Míkka>t 03:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Convert to dab page, it seems that it is already is one.--Lenticel (talk) 04:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. A very common day-to-day search term. Needs rework though. Trivial mention of multiple personalities associated with the term should be removed. Possible remedies could be a disambiguation page as suggested above or perhaps a redirect to the direct usage: The Common Man. LeaveSleaves talk 17:46, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - but it needs an experienced editor to completely rewrite it. - Richard Cavell (talk) 01:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per User:LeaveSleaves. Needs work, but it is encyclopedic. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 01:51, 7 December 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.