Wikibooks:Requests for deletion

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
(Redirected from Wikibooks:VFD)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Replacement filing cabinet.svgArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions Assistance Requests
General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books General | Technical | Administrative Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions
This project page is move-protected.

Contents

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

Undeletion[edit]

Shortcut:
WB:RFU

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.

Language Arts[edit]

Its a valid topic, perhaps it can be userfied, wish to work on it further. -Inowen (discuss • contribs) 06:23, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Done I've moved it to User:Inowen/Language Arts, so you can take your time to develop it before reindexing with the books. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 07:09, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Bibliography of Henry Hoenigswald[edit]

I fail to understand why this was deleted. JackPotte objects to it being an encylopedia entry, but a bibliography and an encyclopedia entry are not the same thing. There are other bibliographies on Wikibooks (I am reluctant to draw attention to them for fear that our deletion happy Jack will have a field day). I have read the deletion policy and see no obvious reason why this book falls under any of its stipulations. --Tibetologist (discuss • contribs) 19:24, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

@Tibetologist, JackPotte: This seems to me like an in-between case. A large bibliography does seem like a plausible book for this project; on the other hand, a small bibliography is the sort of thing that would be attached to an encyclopedia article, and is not a book in much the same way that most small things aren't books; a book is made up of a bunch of smaller modules that are arranged as a whole.

One view of the role of Wikibooks in the wikimedian sisterhood is that it provides a place for topic coverage that's too in-depth for Wikipedia, especially if it's too in-depth in a coordinated way. This looks rather marginal, of small-to-medium-ish size with relatively little internal structure (mostly just a chronological list). --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 22:31, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

@Pi zero, JackPotte: The reason I moved this to Wikibooks is because the bibliography was deemed too long to host at the bottom of the Wikipedia page for Hoenigswald. So, my thinking was exactly, if it is inappropriate for an encylopedia article that how about a Wikibook. For context, there are Wikipedia pages with bibliographies this size, but also there are a number of bibliographies that are Wikibooks. --Tibetologist (discuss • contribs) 07:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
@Pi zero, JackPotte: So, does the dying down of discussion here mean there is a consensus to restore the article? --Tibetologist (discuss • contribs) 22:52, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Deletion[edit]

Shortcut:
WB:RFD

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.

Please format the heading as == [[PAGE]] == in order to let the bot archive it. If there is a subject box, type [[PAGE]] into the subject box.


Scribus[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Keep . The content is not empty, the original author is still active, and there is a French version which could be translated. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

This book is full of redlinks that will never be completed. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 22:16, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

  1. Wait December 2016‎ is not so far I suppose. The author could be back at the end of the school year. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 23:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  2. Keep: Scribus: Basic concepts contains a recipe and therefore this is a stub that is not absolutely devoid of meaningful content. Policy: Wikibooks:Deletion: "delete pages with no meaningful content". --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 08:43, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Food Safety Guide[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Delete Stub double of HACCP. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

This book is full of redlinks that will never be completed. |Wikibooks=PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions|#default=PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions}} 22:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

  1. Delete too small to be helpful for six months. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 22:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
  2. Keep . There is a subpage, not all red links.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

LGBT Young Adult Literature/Annie on My Mind[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Keep . JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

The page was transwikied from w:en:Annie on My Mind and looks almost similar to the Wikipedia article. Nothing has improved much since, despite some edits, to make the page look less like an encyclopedic article. To rephrase my rationale for deletion, this is Wikibooks, not Wikipedia or a collection of encyclopedic articles. I contacted the one who transwikied the page; he said to go ahead and have it deleted. I could have requested speedy deletion, but I saw a few other editors making contributions, like Thereen and Sandbergja. Therefore, I'm requesting deletion here instead. --George Ho (discuss • contribs) 04:28, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

The Wikipedia material can be a part of a book, so it's not purely encyclopedic. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Linter SQL RDBMS[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Delete . JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

The one-page book has been abandoned eight years ago when its author became inactive, and it's only a bunch of external links.

Science:_An_Elementary_Teacher’s_Guide/Curriculum Materials and Technology[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Delete . Kind of request by the author. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

This page has little useful information and, as teacher of the class, I do not plan on developing it further. I removed it from our Table of Contents and recommend its deletion. Flattail (discuss • contribs) 02:08, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

English-Hanzi[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Delete --Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 02:55, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

This book is just a collection of phrases translated into Hanzi. This book should be scrapped and a new one started, and covers topics like food, how is your day, actions, etc. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 01:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Examples from English-Hanzi[edit]

Train[edit]

  • English-Hanzi/Train: A train is a vehicle with a series of carriages. It runs on a railway. A train can carry a lot of passengers or cargoes.
This is not a page of copyright violation. --Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 22:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
@Efex3: I did not list it here because it is a copy violation. I listed it here to show that it is a collection of sentences. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 16:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Trump 'looks forward to visiting China[edit]

For this example, I found this article on the BBC. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 18:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
This is wrong. This is from the policy:
Although we do not permit verbatim copies of pre-existing works, we do permit annotated texts, which are a kind of text that includes an original text within it and serves as a guide to reading or studying that text. Annotated editions of previously published source texts may only be written if the source text is compatible with the project's license.
BBC has a non-Creative Commons copyright license. The text is incompatible. Also, even if it were correctly licensed, this is not a guide to reading or studying that text. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 04:02, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
There are guides below the text helps to read and understand.--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 04:22, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
@Efex3: While that may be true, the text is still copyrighted. And also, here is the English guide:
US/ state secretary/ Rex Tillerson/ told/ China/ state chairman/ Xi Jinping, Ronald Trump/ president/ looking forward to/ visiting/ China, to enhance/ between both countries/ 's/ understanding.
Your book has not been verified, as you are using a translator. First of all, it is Donald Trump, not Ronald Trump. A native Hanzi speaker needs to check over the book. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 13:46, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted this one as unverified news that may be out of scope. As a native Hanzi, I will check other unverified news as well. This is not Wikinews.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 06:07, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

More unverified news[edit]

I am listing more unverified news that should be deleted as out of scope:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jusjih (talk • contribs)

@Jusjih: News doesn't belong on Wikibooks, regardless of whether it's verified or not. (Nor could the Wikibooks administration afford to take on the burden of verifying news on top of what they do; speaking as a Wikinews reviewer, where we sag under that burden.) --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 02:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Exactly. Does Wikinews accept verified early events to be written as news reports? If yes, I may want to join there as I cannot always catch up today's events, and some old news reports online are gone and accessible either by archive.org or no way. When reviewing the book, many are just simple facts that may likely be kept. Here are even more unverified news to likely delete:
@Pi zero: n:Wikinews:Newsworthiness#New information seems to exclude 8-day-old events, so I will not bother verifying unverified news to move to Wikinews. Am I correct?--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
@Jusjih: You are correct. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 02:30, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Deleted the above 10 pages while too old for Wikinews. Thanks, Pi zero. I will find more to list here.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 06:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

More unverified news:

--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 01:24, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Discussion of English-Hanzi[edit]

This book is a series of English-Chinese materials for language learning, but not a book of food, how is your day, actions, etc.--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 03:22, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Efex3: So is this book a collection of statements? If so, then should there not be another book that teaches individual words and phrases? PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 03:30, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
This book contains a variety of materials used for language learning. It is better to have a method to search for related topics. As you are a software specialist, could you help create a method for searching related topics of this book?--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 04:02, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
What about {{Book search}}? JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 08:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete I thought we had an ongoing discussion about deleting this book, in which the primary issue was copyright; a legal issue, not to be dismissed lightly. I find, though, that as part of some bookkeeping tasks that tbh I failed to check as closely as I presumably should have, that discussion was closed — in a nothing-more-to-be-done sort of way — and archived (at Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/English-Hanzi) despite what looks to me like a gradually forming consensus for deletion. It looks as if the most recent votes were by me and User:Dan Polansky, both for deletion. Did I misunderstand how all that ended? --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
The original discussion should not have been closed. On a related note, I'm also not sure why non-admins have been closing RFD's and RFPs anyways as they generally should get reviewed by an admin before that process happens. --Az1568 (discuss • contribs) 18:50, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

You should delete the pages which are copyright violated, but should not to delete the whole book.--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 21:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

This was Efex3's response to copyright concerns in the previous discussion, as well. Dan Polansky's remarks there had already articulated the counterargument before the response. The key phrase in Dan Polansky's remarks was:
While not every page in the category suffers from this problem, it seems to be best to deal with the pages on a summary level, seeing that the approach taken by the author was reckless toward copyright. This should be deleted ASAP.
--Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 13:00, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
The fact is that some of "copyright violated" examples are not true. Please see the previous discussion here--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 21:58, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
It is only a historical problem even though there is copyright problem in some pages.--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 14:13, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
We should act preemptively in regards to protecting the project from copyright infringement issues but on acting on our own guidance we should also refrain being too aggressive in our policing, and act only on what is a clear infringement resorting to more deep erasures if the copyright owner asks for a pull-down. There are logic reasons to act this way... --Panic (discuss • contribs) 16:42, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
As a new administrator here, I plan to check the content to see which to keep or delete, but not to delete the whole book.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 05:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Recalling Dan Polansky's remark about "reckless toward copyright", and I'm not convinced the author suddenly knows better (the only example I recall was examined and found to have only made the problem worse), it doesn't seem to me that the Wikibooks adminsitration should be taking on the open-ended task of trying to apply the sort of copyright standards to all this material that the author has not been applying. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 02:09, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
is this to be a phrasebook or sorts? Something like Omniglot, but for Mandarin phrases？If so, I can see the value of it. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 02:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Previous discussion of English-Hanzi[edit]

Comment I am transcluding the last discussion here. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 18:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I have removed the transclusion of Wikibooks:Requests_for_deletion/English-Hanzi since that is very confusing. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 19:57, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
To remind, the previous discussion is at Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/English-Hanzi. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 13:06, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
*Please see the previous discussion here--Efex3 (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Rfd-survived[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Consensus to keep. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Not needed, I have managed to incorporate this feature into {{talkheader}}. See Template:Talk header/sandbox and it's subpage, Template:Talk header/sandbox/text. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 01:58, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Keep In my experience, we don't delete things like this just because it's possible to do without them. On the contrary, at most we mark them deprecated or historical or some such. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 05:33, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 15:15, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Keep --Az1568 (discuss • contribs) 18:52, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

The new creations of PokestarFanBot[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted

Today this unapproved bot has created a group of pages to be reviewed (but I don't want to), sometimes under its owner account, consisting in some static lists of the books pages. However, there wasn't any previous discussion about these new subpages whose books authors didn't need, and they are redundant of the categories, the TOC and Special:PrefixIndex. So I think that it's just an experiment to keep in the PokestarFan's PC files or user subpages. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Delete JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 17:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete Doesn't see a purpose to compensate for the overhead of these pages. Seems like a sort of thing to discuss extensively with the community before perhaps acting. The unapproved bot aspect is also not good. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 18:01, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
So just delete all of the bot's pages? EDIT: I've gone ahead and blocked the bot as "Unapproved bot". Please leave me a msg on my page if this is incorrect. Thanks. Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 19:08, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
@Atcovi: The block seems reasonable to me. The behavior of the bot has been problematic at best, and I seem to recall JackPotte talking about blocking any account running that bot other than for a pre-approved limited test run (don't recall if they said they would, or merely said they were considering it). At any rate, I do think the bot has been run too casually. We don't usually get to the point of blocking bot accounts, because usually their operators are very conservative about running them prior to community approval.

At some point, presumably, creating a really massive number of these pages even in a userspace would become a problem. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs)

+1. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 13:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete , obviously. I am glad the bot was blocked, and I would be happy to see the operator blocked as well. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
As an admin, I have to do tedious work like this... I'm working on deleting several pages from the bot and the main account. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 13:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
might as well Delete . I would volunteer to delete the whole thing but im not. anyways, nuke. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 14:44, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikijunior:How_Things_Work/Binary[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Merged. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 11:49, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


Wikijunior:How_Things_Work/Binary is a duplicate of Wikijunior:How_Things_Work/Binary_Numbers. The second of those two articles is better developed and has much more content. GKFXtalk 14:11, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Merge.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 02:58, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Merge JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 07:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
    • There's not very much content in the deletion candidate that doesn't exist in some form in Binary Numbers, so while a merge is obviously the correct policy thing to do, in practice there won't be very much merging to do. GKFXtalk 08:15, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Merge. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 19:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

If nobody opposes this, I will mark this RfD Merge in 7 days. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 22:33, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

@PokestarFan: Don't, please. You've been asked not to close RFDs. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 01:46, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Merge. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 02:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Windows Command Prompt Commands[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Delete per consensus and user request. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 01:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Could be possibly speedy. 1) It is redundant to Windows Batch Scripting; 2) contains copyvio by pasting output of Windows cmd.exe command helps, e.g. in Windows Command Prompt Commands/mkdir; you have to click on "[Expand]" in the page to see the content. Please don't merge anything into Windows Batch Scripting. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

  1. Delete Even if this text is spread over the Internet, its original copyright is not compatible with ours. Moreover its original author had announced that he won't finish the book, so there won't be any relevant content in the medium term. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 18:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm self-nominating the book an will probably never finish it. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 23:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
  1. Delete per JackPotte.BukhariSaeed (discuss • contribs) 02:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

World History/Effects of the First World War[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Purged. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 14:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I just found it a likely copyvio, maybe except the first two versions, thus requesting deleting most versions, not all of them.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 05:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

It had been copied by EikwaR, so I've just restored the older version before hidding the others. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 14:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

User:Gjoniikarrrica[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted - speedy would've been fine. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 02:42, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

This userpage appears to be a copy of an article (Gjon Karrica), which was deleted five times on English Wikipedia in 2015. The user has made no other visible edits to Wikibooks. I think it is outside the project scope per WB:HOST and WB:SOAP. Green Giant (discuss • contribs) 00:25, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Start an Internet Business[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 11:35, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


This "book-stub" has been around for several years, originally in a copyvio form, but now with just a discouraging message. I appreciate that any business (let alone an internet business) will be tough but is that really in line with the Wikibooks purpose? We have several business-related books at various stages of development but this is one that we could do without (unless someone wants to make a go of it or merge it somewhere). Green Giant (discuss • contribs) 21:46, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

  1. Delete as nominator. Green Giant (discuss • contribs) 10:21, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
  2. Delete It has never been a book. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 21:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment The topic itself isn't out of place, imo. There doesn't appear to be significant content there to justify calling it a "book", though, nor a framework for a book. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 23:24, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment This almost reads like a leaflet. It could be expanded but I doubt there will be enough to fill the "sense" of a book. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 13:45, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, there's no sense of incipient book-ness about it. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:08, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete In addition to/support of the above: it uses first person singular pronouns, seems to plug a couple of commercial sites, and is signed with "I hope this article is informative and very helpful to you." --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 14:08, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete then delete. It is like a leaflet or brochure. Types of things are common on the internet. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 02:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Category:Guides and manuals[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 11:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


I’ve been looking at this category for a few days now but I cannot see where it fits. The text on the page talks about "How to" guides as an example but it seems to me that if someone is searching for a how-to, they will probably search for the subject more than this category. There appear to be numerous books that could theoretically be categorised here but I imagine the need to create subcategories will arise. I don’t see this category as being necessary for organising books, but I might be wrong. Green Giant (discuss • contribs) 10:20, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

  1. Delete as nominator. Green Giant (discuss • contribs) 10:21, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
  2. Delete Doesn't fit to our classification Category:Subject:Books by subject, and the Universal Decimal Classification would be more appropriate if we needed one more. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
  1. Delete not fit. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 20:10, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Love Intimacy and Romance[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 25 February 2018 (UTC)


Hello,

I uploaded this document by mistake, I want to delete this page and want to unpublish my book from Wikibooks.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irene Pearson (discuss • contribs) 08:27, 1 February 2018‎

There isn't any Love Intimacy and Romance book here. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 09:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
@Irene Pearson: It looks as if you did upload a cover image to Commons (which is one of our sister projects), with a back-cover-type description of the book. That image is here, and you could request its deletion by editing that page (follow the link) to add the following markup (I think):
{{delete|request by uploader}}
--Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 12:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
@Pi zero:, its {{speedy|request by uploader}} for a immediate. the "delete" is for a deletion discussion for community discussion. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 14:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
@Itene Pearson: Done on Commons. Green Giant (discuss • contribs) 18:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Open_and_Distance_Education/Course_Design/Overview[edit]

It is an orphan. I decided to put the content on the parent page "Course_Design".

@Rjbfigueroa: Done . Next time you can add a {{speedy}} tag. See Wikibooks:Deletion policy. --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:10, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Python Programming/pyFormex[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Keep . The external link works, so the reason to delete it does not exist now.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:33, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

The website for the module is down, and so the page is not needed. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 00:26, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

  1. Delete Empty page. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 11:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
  2. Delete virtually empty page, aside from 1 sentence. Artix Kreiger (discuss • contribs) 13:41, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
  3. Comment A Google search shows the website for the library has moved to http://www.nongnu.org/pyformex/ , so that issue doesn't justify deletion. It might be that that specific library is too niche a topic for the scope of the book, but in any case I feel like this isn't the right place for that discussion (as opposed to the talk pages of the book), at least at first. -- Duplode (discuss • contribs) 23:24, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
  4. Keep The website http://www.nongnu.org/pyformex/ is not down; and pyformex is on pypi[1]. The page is a stub, but let us keep it until someone decides to expand on it. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:40, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
  5. Keep The website works. While it is a clear stub, it can be developed. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 19:10, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Merging multiple pages of Python Programming[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Keep . This request is a bit stale now, and all are in favour of keeping the pages.Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 06:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I have merged these to Python Programming/3rd-party modules. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 21:19, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Keep There are at least two problems:
  1. You didn't add everything into Python Programming/3rd-party modules (eg: "import MySQLdb").
  2. The topic of Python Programming/3rd-party modules seems to large to me, and its content must be too long to avoid scrolling a lot when searching a needle in the haystack on a slow page. Moreover, this lack of precision is undesirable to create the links to the sister project (eg: w:numpy, w:PyQt), which could bring us more visitors.
JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 09:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Page merges inside a project only require community consensus if you seek reassurances regarding your actions, consensus should be gathered among the project's editors and a merge tag is not necessary, you do the job yourself unposed or express your "merge" concept on the project's talk page.
I move that this talk stream should indeed be move to the project's talk page and no merge tag be used on individual project pages (this is not Wikipedia).
PS: Page merges are distinct from deletions (like the one above on the same book space (deletions merit a discussion if content or structure is lost, as we do not outright delete stubs and proposed for deletion content may be of use elsewhere)). --Panic (discuss • contribs) 11:24, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Keep Per JackPotte and Panic. There would be no real gain out of such a merge; it would result in a potentially overlong page that merely agglutinates disjoint topics. --Duplode (discuss • contribs) 23:31, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Keep obviously. If the Python Programming book team (which is basically me) decided to introduce a nested chapter structure, they would do it by renaming, not by copying and deleting. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 09:42, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Programming for Palm OS[edit]

Programming for Palm OS/SuperWaba[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Keep --Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:54, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

This page has been a stub since it was created 12 years ago. PalmOS no longer exists and SuperWaba no longer supports PalmOS, so I'm inclined to conclude that this page is never going to be expanded into anything useful.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:204:c900:919b:489f:5442:6216:25e8 (talk • contribs)

Nominated the entire book. PokestarFan • Talk • Contributions 18:45, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleting old GCSE Books[edit]

Most of the GCSE books seem to have been completely abandoned (with the last true edit being a decade ago). Furthermore, the specifications have changed, meaning that course materials are now radically different. - Neutrinopenguin 01/04/2018

It's not obvious because we're talking about more than 200 pages: Category:Subject:General_Certificate_of_Secondary_Education. So they could have an interest, at least historically. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 08:56, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
Since I am planning on writing new guides for them, would it be perhaps acceptable if I mentioned they are uncompleted and unfinished as well as linked from there to the new guides then?

Neutrinopenguin 10:58, 1 April 2018 (GMT)

Sure. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 13:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Pinyin[edit]

Similar to English-Hanzi, should unverified news be deleted?

--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:41, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Rather than delete them, I think it should suffice if these news articles are cited from the source which they are taken from. For instance, the last article which you have linked above is exactly the headline of this BBC article. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 04:04, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
News sites have no sense of humor regarding copying of their material; it's their livelihood, after all. Wikinews has extremely stiff anti-plagiarism standards (no, not just copyright violation, plagiarism). I recommend against Wikibooks poaching on Wikinews territory, in this regard. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 07:42, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
n:Wikinews:Newsworthiness#New_information excludes 8-day old events, so even if verified, Wikinews will not accept them. If we cannot keep them here, maybe Wikipedia has articles to retrofit them, like history of Afghanistan. The same way may apply to deleted unverified news under English-Hanzi.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 18:47, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
I'm only responding to the initial question. To Wikibooks the validity of the any news (linked or referenced) is irrelevant if it does not constitute the basis of the book's project and even then the burden is (and should be) reversed to prove that the information is false, before taking action. In any case single page deletions of an active project should always be first discussed on that project's talk page. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 01:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Category:Book:Pinyin has even more unverified news.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 17:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
If something looks like a news article, and is part of a bunch of things that look like news articles, and isn't vetted by the standards of actual news articles, its publication does active harm in, and to, the world. The very fact that Wikibooks is not set up, infrastructurally, to apply these sorts of standards rigorously makes it unsuited to hosting such material. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 22:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
  1. Keep as to prevent deletion as no one stated opposition. Even on close remember to make a note on the project's talk page and if Jusjih is interested in saving his "verification work", he can probably create a template and tag all the "offending" pages if no one objects or at least place his research/conclusions or opinions on the relevant page's talk. --Panic (discuss • contribs) 21:16, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete per discussion above. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 22:33, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete A wikibook that purports to teach Pinyin (a romanization of Chinese) should not host unverified news items. While one could claim that these are not supposed to be true sentences, merely example sentences to be used in teaching Pinyin, I would argue that it is in poor taste to use unverified news as example sentences to teach a language. Furthermore, the sentences found in the pages appear to by copyvio, e.g. "An Afghan lawmaker and at least three other people have been killed in a bomb explosion in the capital, Kabul"; to keep these, one would have to argue fair use or de minimis. A similar deletion discussion is in Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/English-Hanzi. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 08:36, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes my learners are having issues with all the answers and it would be great if it was taken down and replaced with an up to date version if possible.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.207.141 (talk • contribs)

Am I supposed to delete my own nominations after long time? There are even more unverified news with other than Hanyu Pinyin:

--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:52, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

As no one has comment for weeks, I am deleting them gradually, but more will be found.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 01:35, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I've deleted a bunch of them. The difficulty is that it's tricky to prove copyright violation for some of them, moreover, Special:Nuke does not work as the created were created too early. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 20:27, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
@Leaderboard:: Yes, I see your deleted pages prefixed "Pinyin/". Our main concern is the book pages being out of scope, whether copyvios or not, like these:

--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 04:39, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Buyer's_Guide_For_Building_a_Computer[edit]

I propose that this book be deleted because

  1. Content is old and outdated
  2. The little content already inside has been already incorporated into the far better How_To_Assemble_A_Desktop_PC/Choosing_the_parts page.

There were already suggestions to incorporate its text into the book mentioned above, but in reality, it's already done.
The book mentions that it's meant to supplement the Featured book How_To_Assemble_A_Desktop_PC, but instead it's an old duplicate of a page in the book. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 10:32, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Delete per the nominator. I reviewed the other page listed here and it seems to be way more developed. Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 16:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Case_Studies_in_Sport_Event_Management[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
It's short, but the community is overwhelmingly in favour of Delete . Don't see the point of keeping it any longer. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 18:40, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

I propose deletion for this because it was a book that never was a book. It was started in 2010 and contains and still contains only the skeleton of a book. It was never improved on, added to or made to be anything resembling a book. Delete for now and later on if someone else decides to create such a book, a space will be available for it. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 21:25, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Delete Empty for years. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 21:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete The only substance there is the proposed chapter structure, which is potentially useful — indeed, such guidance can play a key role in making a book successful, or unsuccessful — but there's no empirical evidence that this is guidance of the successful, rather than unsuccessful, sort since not a single chapter has been written. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 23:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Since not a single chapter has been written @Pi zero:, why don't we save the community time and just delete this per WB:NMC: "Pages with no meaningful content. Always check and revert if good content in the revision history was replaced"? If we look into the definition of what a "no meaningful content" verdict really suits, it seems to suit one of the following: "Spam and vandalism, test edits and nonsense, or abandoned pages displaying intent, but no actual content." I believe this book perfectly fits "abandoned pages displaying intent, but no actual content"... so I say we close this RfD and speedy delete this book. Agreed? --Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 21:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
I think there's enough there to warrant thought, which is what we're giving it here. WB:NMC does say, when in doubt, discuss. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 21:43, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Very well then. I will make sure to keep tabs up on this discussion in the mean time. Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 01:08, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete No meaningful content, and full of references to 2010. Clearly abandoned. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 04:50, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Auxiliares_de_Conversación,_Language_and_Culture_Assistants_in_Spain_Survival_Guide/Living[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. This page is clearly abandoned, there is no need for it to stay, and hence I do not foresee any reasonable opposition for its deletion. I should also note that this page is orphaned; one cannot access this page from the main book. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 18:59, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as nom. This is a skeleton of book that's been around since May 2009. NO attempts have been made to enlarge or improve this book at all. Delete with no prejudice to recreating by anyone. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 16:59, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Ethnography_of_Fiddle/Noise_Khanyile[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Keep as developed.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 03:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as nominator. This isn't a book. This is an add for a non-notable musician or music group. This is Wikibooks, this material isn't accceptable for Wikibooks. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 17:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Keep . This looks reasonably developed that it shouldn't be deleted. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 18:52, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Diablo_Canyon_Nuclear_Power_Plant:_The_WikiBook/NRC_Finishes_Safety_Report[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. This would have qualified under WB:SPEEDY. Clearly abandoned and the link is under a paywall anyway. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 18:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as nominator. This consists soley of a link to a copyrighted report. This fails TOS. I recommend immediate deletion of this page. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 17:26, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Diablo_Canyon_Nuclear_Power_Plant:_The_WikiBook/NRC_Responds_to_Pressure[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. As above, would have qualified under WB:SPEEDY. The article is clearly abandoned and I do not foresee any reasonable opposition to its deletion. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 18:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as nominator. Exactly the same rationale as above. This consists soley of a link to a copyrighted report. This fails TOS. I recommend immediate deletion of this page. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 17:49, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Chemical_Principles/Atoms,_Molecules,_and_Ions[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. That is, the whole Chemical Principles book. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 15:29, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete as nominator. This book is a word-for-word copyright of | this source , and their usage policy, available on the same page, at the bottom, is not compatible with ours. Specifically the Introduction in the wikibook is a word-for-word copy of the top portion of | this page. The next portion, in Wikibooks, while not a word-for-word copy, is close enough to be a copy of the remainer of the text.

    This has been | tagged as a copyright violation by User:DMacks since June 11, 2018, with no changes made to the text. I think it's time to delete this now. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 20:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete The level of copy-paste is serious enough. I'll wait a day or so for comments and then delete it. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 20:51, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Noting here for more permanent record that the content was added by User:Elo 1219. Looking at that editor's other contributions, I find that Chemical Principles/Electronic Structure and Atomic Properties is also copyvio from a different PDF (chapter 9) at that same source. DMacks (discuss • contribs) 21:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
The whole book (or major parts thereof) may have to go. Can someone list out all the chapters which are potentially copyvio? Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 21:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
I spot-checked a few more chapters and they are all copyvio (same chapter-numbers as the PDFs). The "preface" item on our book even includes the welcome message signed by the authors of that website's e-book. (please ping me if you want further input here so that I get notified on my home wiki). DMacks (discuss • contribs) 01:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
You don't need to wait to delete a copyvio - or request it here. Tag it with {{copyvio}} or {{delete}} and it can be speedy deleted. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 15:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
I have deleted the whole book except the cover and tagged that so people know what's happened. The cover includes the same statement as the source "You are granted permission for individual, educational, research and non-commercial reproduction, distribution, display and performance of this work in any format." which is incompatible with Wikibooks CC-BY-SA. There is a further note that permission was granted for use here, but no evidence of that exists. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 15:39, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

A Guide To Boston[edit]

Not a textbook. At best, it's a guide to a place, which is more suited for Wikivoyage. I propose that this book be deleted. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 09:37, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Comment I'd have no problem with porting to Wikivoyage if Wikivoyage is interested, and with the assent of the primary author — I don't see a note about this on their user talk page. I don't recall anything that says we can't host an educational book that happens to be about a place, though most of them did get ported to Wikivoyage once it started up. It is on the light side atm, but that isn't necessarily a permanent state. Before deciding what ought to be done I'd like to hear from one or both of a Wikivoyage inside-expert (is that a Wikivoyager? not sure what their local culture prefers) and the primary author. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 11:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Transwiki because it's a single small page for seven years, and otherwise it would be binned. JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 23:23, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
Taking a look at Boston, it seems like that page is developed enough that I'm not sure as to what can be transwikified from Wikibooks. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 11:36, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

'Spambot' pages[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg The following discussion has concluded. Please open a new discussion for any further comments.
Deleted. I'll delete on sight any such spambot-like pages in the future. Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 21:50, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

I've noticed quite a few pages recently which have all the markings of a classic spam page, except that they lack a link and hence the abuse filter does not catch them.

I honestly want to delete them, but the sticking point is WB:AGF; I can't prove that they are a spambot with the generic information on the userpage, even though they seem like one.

What do you think?

Leaderboard (discuss • contribs) 13:08, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Delete - Either oddballs or spam. All very odd and not contributing to the project. I know we have our policies but I would just gp ahead and delete them. It's not a biog deal - if the worst happens then they can be quickly undeleted. --ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 13:22, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Just speedy delete them. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
+1 JackPotte (discuss • contribs) 19:36, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delete; also, two of them I'd be tempted to indefblock as spambots, as they've replaced their spambot-ish text with a completely different spambot-ish text. Note btw that AGF has no official status on Wikibooks; it was never adopted. I've never decided just what I think we should do about AGF here, keeping in mind that Wikinews's Never assume is customized for news, while at the same time I think AGF has done a lot of damage to Wikipedia. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 20:29, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Wikibooks:Requests_for_deletion&oldid=3484132#Deletion"