Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embarazada (2nd nomination)

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 tentative keep. I'm asking where the copyvios are from. If there are copyvios, then I'm going to have to delete this article. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Embarazada

Embarazada (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

• Delete - Wikipedia is Not a Dictionary, and certainly not a Spanish dictionary. This phrase has no importance outside of learning Spanish, at least not enough to warrant its own article in an encyclopedia. Delete. Spawn Man 07:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, but a moderately weak one. It's mucked up a couple advertising campaigns, if you believe the urban legends. If the stories about the "Embarrassed/Pregnant" slipups can be sourced, this could pass the notability threshhold. --UsaSatsui 07:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep this false friend has had a significant cultural impact, and as such has inherent encyclopedic value beyond dicdef. Chubbles 08:24, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Can you provide references and sources to prove that this has had a significant cultural impact? I'd withdraw the nom if you could, but so far I've seen nothing from either AfDs. Spawn Man 08:40, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
• Comment The bulk of the article was written (or possibly, copied) by user:Primetime, who was banned for unapologetic plagiarism. Primetime was also the article's most vocal defender in its first AfD. After his banning many articles he'd worked on were deleted; this was kept because he was not the sole contributor and it did not appear to have been copied outright. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 16:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
  • My main problem is with the article's unnotability in the world - People have said it's been important, but I've yet to see sources for these claims. People have said it's supposed to have stuffed up advertising campaigns - so have other mispellings and grammatical errors, but we don't include those on Wikipedia because they're simply not notable. Hopefully people will appreciate that view when they comment here. Spawn Man 04:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and rewrite away any copyvio. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 02:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

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.