This project page is move-protected.

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
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]

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.

Deletion[edit]

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.



Electromagnetics[edit]

This book is far too short to be called a book. Since it hasn't been changed in the last months, there is no perspective in my eyes. --Utonsal (discusscontribs) 23:18, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Keep - Wikibooks policy is, I think, to keep books that are in their early stages to allow work to be done on them. Granted that there is little happening on this one at present, the field is vast, and work could easily form around the nucleus that is this single page, given time. Chazz (talk) 23:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Delete In fact, the book appears not to have been edited substantively since 2013 (the most recent contentful edit there appears to have been by QuiteUnusual), and does not appear to provide any meaningful framework for a book. So I don't think there's a viable book there, despite the fact that the apparent topic is big enough to support one. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 23:46, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Delete There are stub books, and there are books which have virtually nothing in them, and I'm inclined to think that this is the latter. Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 13:10, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Merge This topic are more to A-level Physics topic (from where I am from), perhaps merge to A-level_Physics maybe a wise decision. Decisions by Encik Tekateki (discusscontribs) 15:52, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
If moving Electromagnetics to "A-level_Physics/Electromagnetics", then Electromagnetics/Electrostatics is also to be moved to "A-level_Physics/Electromagnetics/Electrostatics". Right?--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 04:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Comment This might be better suited for Wikiversity, if any other place - there seems to be little to no progression. This would've probably been slapped with a query tag and deleted after its time was due. I'm not taking a side as I would like to close this myself (to prevent any bias). But I would like @Encik Tekateki: to elaborate more on his position of merging and why this page would hold any water as a part of another established book. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 17:08, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi @Atcovi: , apologizes for late replies. My reasoning is as followed, as the A-Level Physics by far as I know it do not have any pages about electromagnetism( See: https://www.slideshare.net/CerdasFizik/bab-8-elektromagnet-mind-mapping-spm-fizik , SPM is quivalent to A-level where I am coming from), it is preferred to merge this page to the established books to let others authors to build upon the electromagnetic pages. Although the pages is not complete as of now, if there are good contributor(s) expand the pages in due time, the electromagnet page will become good references in Wikibooks. Proposed by Encik Tekateki (discusscontribs) 04:30, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
I might be leaning to this option as I do see potential for other editors to build up on this page. Probably just add a "stub" template and merge. Will let this RFD settle for a while for any more arguments. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:14, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Big Seven Crypto Study[edit]

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

Media_and_Society:_Summer_2019[edit]

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

Remove the Bridge Crossing[edit]

As I am now cleaning up the Puzzle wikibooks on Puzzles/River Crossing , I came across this pages that needed to be deleted due to the pages are listed as list of puzzles which does not add depth to the puzzle wikibooks (which was causing the book to be nominated for deletion at first place) also this was duplicate of the contents I will be writing later on :

  1. Puzzles/Logic puzzles/Bridge Crossing/Solution
  2. Puzzles/Logic puzzles/Bridge Crossing
  3. Puzzles/How do you ... ?/Crossing the Bridge
  4. Puzzles/How do you ... ?/Crossing the Bridge/Solution

Exercise as it relates to Disease/Feeling hot for health[edit]

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

Undergraduate Mathematics[edit]

The scope of this book is too broad. The Linear Algebra wikibook is a good example of what such a project could be. I came up with the idea yonks ago on undergrad myself and no-one else has taken interest, because I was new to the platform and sketching out ideas.

I'm happy to contribute to other projects, I just don't want people to click this malformed idea instead.

Knittedbees (discusscontribs) 08:28, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Question: Knittedbees many of the pages have a rich history, but I noticed on the logs of some that they were imported in May 2014. Is the bulk of the existing content simply imported from English Wikipedia in 2014? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 21:05, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes, the idea was to use Wikipedia as a template, but pretty much writing a few books like Analysis, Algebra and Dynamics from scratch focusing on exercises and worked examples would be a better approach (i.e. nothing like the Wikipedia articles I tried importing). (logged out Knittedbees) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.57.14 (talkcontribs) 23:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
Delete it has a lot of content but as explained above they are merely imported articles from Wikipedia in 2014. As such, readers would be better off reading the updated articles on Wikpedia than reading this book. So it makes sense to get rid of it. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 23:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • As someone with experience in undergrad mathematics, I think the topics in this book are better off as independent wikibooks. Instead, I would favour creating a category of topics that are suitable for undergraduate-level mathematics. P.S: some of the topics are in the wrong category. Stokes' theorem and line integral are in vector calculus, not complex analysis (and there's nothing complex-valued in them, though ideas in line integrals pop up when doing contours and working out complex integrals). Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 11:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Intellectual Property and the Internet/Arab Spring[edit]

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

Euclid's Elements[edit]

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

Centrelink help[edit]

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

NVQ Carpentry Level 2[edit]

I believe this book needs to be deleted as it contains dangerous information which will put lives at risk for all on site, due to the abundance of miss information contained with in the pages. This book also contains some references from publications which are out of date and plagiarised. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.182.106.244 (talkcontribs) 17:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

For perspective, this appears to have started with a comment on the book's talk page by a registered user (who hasn't made any edit on any project afaics), after which an IP6 seconded the criticism and then undid itself, and then the above IP also supported the criticism and also posted here. (I've added a section heading to contain those remarks on the book talk page.) --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 18:26, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Question to 86.182.106.244: can you give any examples of how this book "contains dangerous information" or "miss information" (sic), or is "out of date" or "plagiarised"? Generally books should be fixed rather than discarded if possible. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 00:07, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints "Church Meetings" page[edit]

The page The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/Church Meetings Has information that could be easily put into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints/Church Service The page should probably be deleted, and the information from the former page moved to the latter, considering that the "Church Meetings" page only has three sentences of information in it. PeanutHat (discusscontribs) 08:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Suggest merge and redirect: I don't think this particularly needs deletion, as this would do the job in as satisfactory manner. If doing this please attribute the merged content from the source page. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 10:51, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I think this should be merged with other information on the same subject instead of deleted. User:Abdul_turban — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdul turban (talkcontribs)

Monopoly rules[edit]

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

How To Succeed in College[edit]

Like the previous post, I started this book thinking I would have the time to work on it. I started this book 7 years ago at a time when I thought I would be able to dedicate a fair amount of time to it. Since then, I have not been able to work on it and do not envision having the time to work on it in the future. As the principal author, I encourage the community to delete the book. --Rcragun (discusscontribs) 15:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Rcragun: about this and Statistics for Sociology above: if you are the only contributor then WB:SPEEDY applies. Add {{delete|Nominated by the only significant contributor: please delete all pages in book.}} to the main pages. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 10:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Done. Thank you. --Rcragun (discusscontribs) 14:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Monopoly/The Mega Edition speedy deletion[edit]

Request speedy as nonsense/vandalism. I added a speedy tag, but it was removed [1]. Has been previously speedy deleted, but was recreated [2]. Maybe needs creation protection? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 23:43, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I've deleted it once again.--ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 08:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Fire Simulation for Engineers[edit]

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

Chess Opening Theory/1. a4/1...e5/2. Ra3[edit]

This page doesn't contribute anything meaningful to the book. 96.234.224.176 (discuss) 03:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you please further clarify your standings?
Asked by Encik Tekateki (discusscontribs) 06:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Keep I don't see any problem with it. Sure, there it's a stub, but that isn't a reason to delete. Leaderboard (discusscontribs) 12:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Sunvox Reference[edit]

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

GCSE Physics[edit]

Nominate to delete this as the book is remained a stubs over 8 years. I already moved to partly developed contents to 9-1 Physics/Conservation of energy Also GCSE has moved to 9-1 curriculum in 2020.

Proposed deletion by Encik Tekateki (discusscontribs) 02:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

  • Comment Looks as if the small amount of content produced for this book was moved to another book. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 03:30, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete Not a useful book and GCSE programmes change every year and vary by exam board. --ЗAНИA Flag of the Isle of Mann.svgtalk 09:53, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete Once moved "GCSE Physics/Energy for the Home/Heating Houses" to 9-1 Physics/Conservation of energy, there is no content other than empty sections.--Jusjih (discusscontribs) 06:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

How to Convert Videos for the iPod[edit]

Nominate to delete this due to there are many instructional texts at Wikihow projects:

https://www.wikihow.com/Put-Video-on-Your-iPod https://www.wikihow.com/Put-Videos-on-an-iPod-Touch

Proposed by Encik Tekateki (discusscontribs) 04:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Oppose because the existence of something elsewhere is not a valid reason to delete material from our collection. --Pi zero (discusscontribs) 05:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Merge This could be a good page in the Wikibook Do-It-Yourself, rather then a standalone book with one page. --Mbrickn (discusscontribs) 10:19, 21 January 2021 (UTC)