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. Cirt (talk) 09:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cicerone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This doesn't appear to be a topic. It is a word for a guide. The article doesn't assert notability, rather, it appears simply to attempt to define the word. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. SilkTork *^YES! 23:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Transwiki - It does have notability, being in Brittanica (our rivals) does establish notability, but as a definition. —Ceran^{(sing / see)} (2102 uıןɐd) 23:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Already gives the definition, but also adds some encyclopedic detail. I think it's a useful inclusion.ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:08, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - stub, not dicdef. Notability established. No reason for special consideration. WilyD 14:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep considerable potential for an article. Remove uncited spam for Ray Daniels, and expand. A subject in the Brittanica is automatically included here--its one of our basic criteria that if things are the subject of articles in other encyclopedias, they are notable. DGG (talk) 16:48, 14 November 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.