Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Construction foreman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 (and cleanup), tagged as such. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 23:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Construction foreman[edit]
- Construction foreman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Dicdef with a side of OR. It essentially exists as the 1. def on Wiktionary for foreman. Travellingcari (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep notable topic, weak article. Needs more on how they are trained/selected/employed etc. but it's appropriate to have such an article. JJL (talk) 04:29, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep stub that can be expanded and sourced. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and cleanup. It's more than a simple definition, and the bits that could be read as OR could be easily re-written and referenced. Hersfold (t/a/c) 05:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Would be nice to see it expanded. Gary King (talk) 09:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: It is a dictionary definition with the addition of incorrect information. I.e. the only way to "expand" it is to add specifics, as has been done here, that will apply solely to one nation or state or market. This is why we don't have articles on "maintenance engineer" and "marketing director" and the like. Utgard Loki (talk) 16:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or Transwiki. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - it is only a stub, but a legitimate one. We also need an article on foreman, covering the lowest level of management in industry. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:46, 23 February 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.