Wikibooks:Requests for deletion

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to: navigation, search
Replacement filing cabinet.svgArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions Assistance Requests
General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books General | Technical | Administrative Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions
Requests for (Un)deletion Archives
  • Close discussion with {{closed}}/{{end closed}}
  • RFDs should be moved to subpages at Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/FullPageName
  • RFUs should be moved to subpages at Wikibooks:Requests for undeletion/FullPageName
  • Transclude subpage; remove after 7 days
Icon usage
  • {{subst:icon|info}} - important facts
  • {{subst:icon|keep}} - keep work
  • {{subst:icon|merge}} - merge work
  • {{subst:icon|transwiki}} - copy to another wiki
  • {{subst:icon|delete}} - delete work
  • {{subst:icon|redirect}} - delete and redirect
  • {{subst:icon|comment}} - neutral opinion


Wikimedia Commons logo Add a new entry

Pages and books can be deleted by administrators. These decisions are generally backed by consensus from a discussion on this page under the deletion section. No process is perfect, and as such, pages or books can be nominated for undeletion in this section. The following is the procedure:

  1. Locate the page entry in the deletion log or the archived discussion. Some deleted pages have been speedily deleted without discussion.
  2. Review the Wikibooks:Deletion policy and Wikibooks:Media. If you can build a fair case on something which wasn't considered before, you can raise the issue here.
  3. Please add new nominations at the bottom of the section. Include a link to the archived discussion (or deletion log if there was none) and your rationale for why the page should be undeleted. If the community agrees, the page will be restored.

If you wish to view a deleted module or media file, list it here and explain why. An administrator will provide the deleted module to you in some form - either by quoting it in full, emailing it to you, or temporarily undeleting it. If you feel that an administrator is routinely deleting modules prematurely, or otherwise abusing their tools, please discuss the matter on the user's talk page, or at Administrative Assistance.


I'd like this page that I created some 8 years ago undeleted. I am not getting any assistance from the person who deleted it, QuiteUnusual. There was no discussion, no contact made, just a unilateral deletion...and with faulty justification. Here is the log entry: 10:51, 16 December 2014 QuiteUnusual (discuss | contribs) deleted page Cookbook:Oatmeal Stout Brownies (Use of copyrighted work without permission. Please read Terms of Use: copied from a commercial source (obvious from the intro as this states it was a competion winner) - e.g.,

Here is the text of my request and their response:

Hi. Would you mind restoring the page I created, Cookbook:Oatmeal Stout Brownies. You wrote: Use of copyrighted work without permission. Please read Terms of Use: copied from a commercial source (obvious from the intro as this states it was a competion winner...)
First, it is my recipe. I posted it here, sharing it with y'all.
Second, it was not copied from a commercial sources. Again, it's my recipe. I shared it here, and I own the copyright.
Third, it was not a competition winner, although it was a finalist in a competition. I retain copyright, although the competition did get permission to use the recipe.
You may want to check with folks before you just delete stuff. I see no comments on my page. Next time, ask, please.
Thanks. Joe --JRStutler (discusscontribs) 04:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
You must follow the rules for donating copyright work. As copyright violation is illegal and this was an unambiguous violation there was no need to ask before deleting. Nex time follow the rules first. Before anything can happen you need to prove you are in fact the copyright owner. Anybody can register an account with any name they choose so there's no way of telling who you are or what you own. All we have is your say-so that you own something that appears elsewhere on the Internet with a clear copyright notice. Once you've followed the rules and have proved your ownership then the recipe can be undeleted,]. The onus is on you to demonstrate ownership. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 18:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Please assist/advise. Thanks! Joe. --JRStutler (discusscontribs) 00:20, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
One method to help us in this process is to send an email to info﹫ from an email address that is associated with the official website of the content, or the site where the content was originally published. In this case, we will need proof that you are in fact Joe Stutler and have the permission to re-publish the recipe from the contest. We'll also need a written statement specifying that the content is released under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Thank you for your understanding and patience. This procedure is in place to ensure that Wikimedia respects copyrights and the rights of authors. --Az1568 (discusscontribs) 05:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
As I noted on my talk page, the recipe in question clearly states it is owned by someone else ("This recipe, created by Joe Stutler, was a national finalist in the 2006 Cooking With Beer Challenge"), the date of this ownership claim is before it was added here and there was no evidence that the person uploading it here was the owner beyond the similarity of the user account name. It is also normal practice for copyright to be assigned to those running a competition making it more important to ensure that the ownership is confirmed. In order for the WMF to protect itself from claims of copyright violation, it needs a record of the owner agreeing the release under the appropriate license (per Az, above) which it can point to in the event of legal action. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 10:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)


Wikimedia Commons logo Add a new entry

Pages that qualify for speedy deletion do not require discussion. This section is for discussing whether something belongs on Wikibooks or not for all other cases. Please give a reason and be prepared to defend it. Consensus is measured based on the strength of arguments not on numbers. Anyone can participate and everyone is encouraged to do so.

Please add a new request for deletion at the bottom of this section with a link to the page or book in the heading and a justification. Also place the {{rfd}} template at the top of the page you want deleted. If you are nominating an entire book, {{rfd}} goes on the top-level page, but not subpages. Nominations should cite relevant policy wherever possible.

High School Trigonometry, High School Engineering, High School Chemistry, High School Earth Science, High School Life Science, High School Biology, High School Calculus, High School Geometry, High School Probability and Statistics[edit]

We have received an OTRS ticket, number 2015011310024438, from the CK-12 Foundation requesting that these books (which are copied from CK-12) are properly attributed to them. The relevant text of the OTRS ticket, for those without access is:

"...I am a science associate with the ck-12 foundation. I'm writing on behalf of ck-12 in regards to the versions of our flexbooks you have published on the wikibooks site. To begin I should say that we are extremely pleased to be featured on your site and greatly appreciate you taking the time to import our texts. We would like to ask that you attribute our content using the guidelines present on the ck-12 website. We also ask that you add this attribution to the individual concept pages; I stumbled upon a few of them and was concerned until i went back to the book and chapter pages and saw the attribution."

I can confirm the email comes from CK-12 based on the mail headers, etc. In responding to this request I have reviewed the CK-12 attribution guidelines here and noted that their license is CC-BY-NC. This license is incompatible with Wikibooks. Specifically, it does not allow commercial use, and Wikibooks does. Given this, I believe we have no choice but to delete the books.

I, or any admin, could delete these after 7 days as a copyright violation without an RFD, but given that some of them are featured books, I am raising this RFD to encourage others to check my interpretation of the license issue is correct. Note that I have named the nine books that are obviously CK-12 copies, but this deletion requirement may apply to other books from the same source - I will add them hear if I identify more. Thanks. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 13:05, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

The importers of the content should also be notified and even admonished for such an extensive violation. Admins should do random content cross-pollination checks as they delete the pages by selecting some random bits of text and see if they find a match in other wikibook works. --Panic (discusscontribs) 14:04, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Note that this is more a violation of the terms of use than of copyright (in the consequence that it is an unauthorized relicensing of the works).
One thing that I've been thinking about is the WHY we can't have non-commercial content on Wikibooks. It seems counterproductive in the primary goal of creating free content and not an issue to any of the parts involved in the work we do here. It seems simply a political decision and we may need to revisit it as it needn't be so, any primary objections would be about cross pollination but as this instance proves in a connected world that argument is very weak. --Panic (discusscontribs) 23:43, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
The decision to only have material that was reusable for commercial reasons was made by the Wikimedia Foundation, it isn't something we can change locally unfortunately. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 08:52, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
This is quite interesting. A PDF of the CK-12 material was uploaded to Commons (here) in 2009. This is licensed with CC-BY-SA. It is therefore possible the material we have is permitted, if it was based on this older version. It'll need some more digging. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 12:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I am interested in proper copyright problems where some git copies and pastes things from elsewhere without any permission. The kind of nitty gritty isn't my concern and I would be all for providing whatever attribution they want and then ignoring the problem. If someone from the Foundation (the Wikimedia Foundation of the CK-12 Foundation) instructs us to delete then we should, otherwise we should just carry on as normal...--ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 13:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

It's annoying always having to find this in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion, when are we going to take care of these books? Thanks. --atcovi (talk) 15:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

The Wrestling Universe[edit]

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Wikibooks:Undergraduate Mathematics/Continuous function[edit]

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Wikibooks:Undergraduate Mathematics/Expectation/Expected value[edit]

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.


This page is now redundant with the other pages in the Trignomentry book. It is also left unused , very little content and few contributors.--Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 08:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

  1. No discussion on this issue? Or should I mark it for speedy? --Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 17:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
like this page has enough info to educate readers. It could also be left for expansion by a different user later on, what'd you think about this? (btw can you show the other pages with "very little content"?) --Atcovi (talkcontribs) 08:10, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikijunior:Dinosaur Alphabet[edit]

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.

Pragmalinguistic peculiarities of English Slogan in Fashion Domain[edit]

The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.