Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KMLE Medical 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, consensus is that the article does not have the significant coverage in reliable sources in order to meet the relevant notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 08:11, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

KMLE Medical Dictionary

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article fails WP:NOTABILITY, WP:WEB. This is a Search aggregator, not a dictionary. Has a few links but they seem to be unreadable, press releases or merely trivial coverage or mentions. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. which is clearly noted in the notability guidelines. Google news yeilds nothing. Part of a larger spam campaign that seeded WP with spamlinks. Seems to be nothing more than Self-promotion and product placement, which wikipedia is WP:NOT.Hu12 (talk) 06:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I am the admin of the site. Anyways, if wikipedia editors think it should be deleted, we are ready to accept the deletion/bans/etc, but of note I would like to point out I searched every medical dictionary (stedman, dorland, tabers) on google news, and none are noted. Also our site officially licenses the American Heritage Medical Dictionary and is not just a meta-search. You mentioned trivial coverage, but I can note over 5 books that reference our site, that are still being published. As for the "spam" please see my comments at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#Request_unlisting_of_kmle.com The site was bookmarked enough to go to the main page on de.lico.us, so "normal" people do find the site helpful as well. Digirave (talk)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. per my nom. Spam spam spam. fails WP:WEB. Wikipedia is NOT a "vehicle for advertising"--Hu12 (talk) 05:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Conflict of interest since I am the admin, but I have explained my points many times already, and the "spam" in the articles were edited to try to be more accurate and not just senseless advertising/spam, which stopped anyways without any intervention from wikipedia... Digirave (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 12:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does not meet WP:N, WP:WEB, or WP:CORP.  Probably could be a speedy as spam.  Vegaswikian (talk) 00:17, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:WEB, and verging on WP:ADVERT territory Gary King ( talk )  19:15, 24 April 2008 (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.