Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Analogical conceptual dictionary

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 delete. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:17, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Analogical conceptual dictionary

Partial translation of the Spanish WP article Diccionario Analógico Conceptual, which, like this article, is completely unsourced and appears to be in part original research and in part an advertisement for the Web site zirano.com. I thought of redirecting this to Thesaurus, since it seems to be about a type of thesaurus; but "analogical conceptual dictionary" gets zero hits in Google, Google Books, and Google Scholar searches, so it seems a very unlikely search term. (The equivalent Spanish term gets only 27 ghits—most, if not all, of which relate to the Zirano site.) Deor (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've just noticed that the article was speedied as blatant advertising a couple of days before it popped up again. Nevertheless, a proper AfD seems better than another G11 speedy, so that any further re-creations can be G4ed. Deor (talk) 05:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Advertising. Usrnme h8er (talk) 12:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject is not notable, and the article would need a complete rewrite for clarity and tone. — Twinzor ^{Say hi!} 16:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. (1) This is WP:SPAM for zirano.com. (2) zirano.com is not notable per WP:WEB. (3) This is a recreation of a previously deleted article without substantially changing the content or a change in the notability of the subject, and thus should be deleted per WP:RECREATE. (4) In Spanish, the term "analogical conceptual dictionary" may be used, and in English, it's just "conceptual dictionary", and that article already exists. (I created it after the previous AfD). LinguistAtLarge 19:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you supply a link to the previous AfD? I didn't run across any when I was researching this. Deor (talk)

Sorry, my bad. It was a G11 speedy delete last time around. No AfD discussion. LinguistAtLarge 21:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-- Spam. I have notified the Spanish Wikipedia.--Jmundo (talk) 19:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 22:39, 30 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.