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.

Hello thanks for educating me about how it supposed to work, but my content (page) was speedily deleted and I had no chance to save the content so I can merged it in the existing book in accordance to the rules. Would you let me recover the content in the deleted page below? For a history of the (very short) discussion see User_talk:C.t.chin#copy_.2F_paste. Emailing the content to me would be great, thank you so much!

7 December 2015

   (Deletion log); 08:46 . . QuiteUnusual (discuss | contribs) deleted page OpenSCAD User Manual/General 2 ‎(copy paste without attribution)
   (Move log); 08:45 . . QuiteUnusual (discuss | contribs) moved page OpenSCAD User Manual/General (by c.t.chin) to OpenSCAD User Manual/General 2 without leaving a redirect ‎(we don't want your username in the book title)

C.t.chin (discusscontribs) 04:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

where do you want it merged to? QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 10:58, 9 December 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]

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

The Wrestling Universe[edit]

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


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


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

All pages contained in category:pywikibot and it's sub-cats.[edit]

I propose this hole pywikibot manual for deleting. The origin pywikibot manual is hold by mw:, you'll find it as mw:Manual:Pywikibot with all it's content. The pages at Wikibooks are just older copies, they are outdated and nobody will update it here. The local copy may confuse developers and the duplication is not useful at all. Xqt (discusscontribs) 16:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you propose that the media wiki book be only hosted by Wikibooks (it seems the better project to have it), not that I particularly care, only addressing your duplication concern. I really don't see lack of advancement in itself as a proper reason for deletion. --Panic (discusscontribs) 16:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The manual is nearby the Mediawiki software (and its manual) where it concerns to. Maybe it was the first thought coming from meta. It does not make any sense to spread manuals on several platforms, especially when nobody keeps it up-to-date. This would be confusing bot owners. It is a property of that instruction manual of an often used bot framework in perpetual beta state to be outdated within a short time. Therefor I guess it would be a good idea to delete this page duplications, which you can verify by the version histories. Xqt (discusscontribs) 19:00, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I fail to see the rationality in discussing notions like "nearby" when we are talking about the same Internet software infrastructure and same hardware setup (Wikimedia) especially after the merging efforts being made. In any case this isn't the place to argue about that particular need.
I'm not taking a position of opposition against your request at present, just pointing out that the grounds your are formulating it are very weak and in my view misdirected...
In regards to Wikibooks the nearness to the software isn't an issues, nor is it the duplication, in fact the issues you raised (confusion, etc) are good points to press the developers to, especially in light of general Wikimedia policies that fragmented the scope of each wiki subproject, move the manual here (in fact every manual that resides in the Media Wiki project), even facilitating future translations of the same. Our project is the best one to develop manuals and textbooks, that unarguably is our raison detre. Look for instance how we centralized our use of images on Commons, the logic is the same... --Panic (discusscontribs) 20:08, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
@Panic2k4, Xqt: It seems to me that since these manuals are for Mediawiki software, and are self-referential to Wikimedia, they should be kept at Mediawiki, especially since the software is used for non-Wikimedia sites. If we imported the manuals, it would follow that we should import all the descriptions of extensions and parser functions and so forth. That's what the Mediawiki website is for; to host it all here would muddle our mission and would be self-referential. But that is all a whole debate in itself. If we're going to have one, we should have them all, and so it makes no sense just having this one manual here, which is only an outdated version of the one at Mediawiki anyway. Liam987 talk 21:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Delete per my rationale above. Liam987 talk 21:02, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Delete. it is a mess, unlikely to be fixed. this was imported from meta, Pywikibot/ is some automated code documentation, which we already have on John Vandenberg (discusscontribs) 14:58, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Delete. @Liam987, Panic2k4, Xqt: As above: confusing, outdated, and inconsistent with the status of the rest of our (MediaWiki-based) documentation. Fhocutt (WMF) (discusscontribs) 20:05, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

What's the status on this? The discussion's quiet and I see a clear consensus to delete. --Fhocutt (WMF) (discusscontribs) 12:32, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Things happen when they happen here. It'll get deleted when an admin has the time and inclination amongst dealing with the spam and vandals. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 13:53, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
I'd appreciate it if this can be resolved quickly. We have mw:Google Code-in 2015 coming up, and these pages cause confusion for beginners, because they appear high in Google results, seem authoritative because they are 'Wikimedia pages', but they are wrong/misleading/out of date/empty/etc.
If they cant be deleted quickly, how should we tag them so alert the reader of their lack of utility? John Vandenberg (discusscontribs) 22:00, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
A notice can easily be added at top of every page pointing to an updated resource (not a generic portal) or a portal can be prominently displayed on the cover page indicating that the book is out of date.
I dont agree with the arguments for the deletion, will not support but also not object to it as the content seems to be freely available elsewhere in an updated form. My view is that Mediawiki manuals should be on Wikibooks, the same rational that made us move our images to Commons all the other non-Wikibooks issues are just that, not a Wikibook problem that we need to address. --Panic (discusscontribs) 05:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Panic, then I must ask you to look at the content again. It is not a manual. Most of the pages are auto-generated junk. e.g. Pywikibot/ - what do the plus and minus mean in those lists? Some pages like Pywikibot/Basic use could be used in a manual, but however is full of incorrect information about pywikipedia (a dead project) instead of pywikibot, and anyone wanting to seriously write a manual about pywikibot for a real audience would start by using the equivalent pages on MediaWiki, such as mw:Manual:Pywikibot/Basic use. John Vandenberg (discusscontribs) 05:44, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


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

Cookbook:Char Siu[edit]

Not sure if this page qualifies for speedy deletion, so I am requesting it to be deleted here. I've noticed that Cookbook:Char Siu is an exact copy-and-paste of Cookbook:Char Sui (note the switched "u" and "i") and, according to Kgroat's edit summary on Cookbook:Char Siu, was intended to be a move to the correct name for the page. I am requesting it to be deleted to make way for a proper page move from Cookbook:Char Sui to Cookbook:Char Siu. (There is only one revision in Cookbook:Char Siu's page history, not including my addition of the {{rfd}} template.) CabbagePotato (discusscontribs) 06:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

@CabbagePotato: I think this easily qualifies as non-controversial housekeeping. I've changed it to a speedy deletion request on the page. @Kgroat: registered users can rename pages using the move tab at the top of the page. Please use this feature rather than copy-and-pasting because it preserves the edit history. Green Giant (discusscontribs) 16:48, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


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

nominate "Subject/headline"[edit]

.original research; .being a source text; .being a game guide; being an attempt to use Wikibooks as a personal webhost; or .having profound issues with neutral point of view.

Could you properly link the page you are proposing to delete Jacobkoh? --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:15, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Labdoo Guide/How To Start[edit]

Please delete as content outdated and no update planned, as we moved to a local wiki in our homepage.

Not a valid deletion criterion. Other editors may choose to expand the material. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 16:21, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Labdoo Guide[edit]

Please delete as content outdated and will not be updated, as we moved to a local wiki

Not a valid deletion criterion. Other editors may choose to expand the material. QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 16:21, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Modern Greek[edit]

Request to delete Modern_Greek/Lesson_7x. Content fully integrated on updated page Modern_Greek/Lesson_2.1x

Done. You appear to have moved all the content by copy / paste. The site license requires the history (i.e., the record of the original authors) to be maintained. If you want to do something similar in future please use the {{Now merged}} template to request a merge. Thanks - QuiteUnusual (discusscontribs) 09:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks @QuiteUnusual:. Yes, I've copied a few pages to fresh pages. I'm still sorting through the old content. I have just tried a "now merged", hope that it worked. Many thanks. Aphoneyclimber (discusscontribs) 13:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Request to delete Modern Greek/LegacyLesson_5b. There is nothing here that doesn't separately exist in Modern Greek/Lesson 02.2 which is the correct structure.

NOTE: There are on-going rfd's and merge requests for this. There appears to have been no active work on the Modern Greek Wikibook for many years and my attempts at getting previous contributors involved appears to have failed. I have made many changes / improvements and have had no comments, so I expect no discussion regarding these on going changes. Hopefully as the content grows some more contributors will be attracted.

Romanian/List of words[edit]

If we put the large amount of numbers − amounting to 2/3 of the content − aside, it doesn't provide readers with any helpful information about the Romanian language. Some of the translations are even in Polish, not in Romanian. --Robbie SWE (discusscontribs) 11:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

So you are requesting deletion of a single page? @Robbie SWE --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 01:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
@Atcovi: Yes, I am. I just started going through the Romanian pages so more deletions might be necessary in the near future. PS: upon further investigation, we have Romanian/Months and days of the week and Romanian/Numbers from 0 to 999, which contain the same information as the page I proposed for deletion. --Robbie SWE (discusscontribs) 10:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)