Wikibooks:Requests for deletion

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
(Redirected from Wikibooks:VFD)
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 | Renaming
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.


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.

US History/Vikings[edit]

Erik the Red and Leif Erikson are discussed in the section on European history. Erik's other children, and Snorri Sturluson, seem irrelevant. Pittsburgh Poet (discusscontribs) 22:45, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you nominating the whole page, or just two sections for deletion? Normally what to include or not in a book is decided through consensus by the book contributors on the book's or page's discussion page. --darklama 01:41, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

I am nominating the orphaned chapter US History/Vikings under the section Orphans in "Discussion." I'll go to the book's discussion page, then. Thank you. Pittsburgh Poet (discusscontribs) 10:56, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

It's almost 4 years since the last contribution to that page (not sure how active other pages of the book are though) so you could make the edits as you see fit provided you explain your rationale in the Edit Summary. The fact that the information is already included elsewhere in the book seems a good enough reason.--ЗAНИA Flag of Estonia.svgtalk 20:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Corset/Popular culture[edit]

A virtually random and pointless list of women wearing a particular garment. What educational purpose could this serve? —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Keep - The list is on topic and serves a purpose inside the work it belong to, this is not Wikipedia. --Panic (discusscontribs) 22:46, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Seems entirely relevant to the book.--ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 18:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per above.--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 03:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)


I think that the content in this page does not fit in within Wikibooks. This seems to be an article by itself , not meant for a book. This is better served somewhere else.--Leaderboard 06:24, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

It's actually an article fragment. It could be expanded into a book, but it would take one heck of a lot of planning, planning that the sole author doesn't seem to have done yet. I'd suggest a wait and see on this one. Chazz (talk) 07:51, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
It's a spam page created by a bot - deleted. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 08:28, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

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)