Wikibooks:Requests for deletion

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

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

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

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 (discuss • contribs) 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 (discuss • contribs) 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 (discuss • contribs) 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 (discuss • contribs) 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 (discuss • contribs) 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 ^talk 13:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

The Wrestling Universe

Original research and no meaningful content, no NPOV, and not edited in over a year. See also The Wrestling Universe/John Cena. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

@Justin - The Page in the Heading doesn't look meaningful, but scrambled words. But this is room for improvements, this page can easily be turned around. The John Cena page I call for a Keep, I'd leave it for anyone to improve. --atcovi (talk) 00:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I have improved this article to the best of my ability, I do not think it falls into any of the deletion criteria @Justin. But it's up to you now if you are going to close this request. Thanks for bringing this page to the public's attention. --atcovi (talk) 01:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikibooks:Undergraduate Mathematics/Continuous function

This page doesn't seem to belong to Wikibook as part of a book:

• It's part of the WB namespace, not the main namespace.
• It's mainly a duplicate of Undergraduate Mathematics/Continuous function.
• The other page is formatted and integrated into the book, the objected one isn't.
• The page seems to be an import from w:Continuous function. "Red links", templates, and interwiki links use Wikipedia, not Wikibooks.
• No other WB page links to that page.

In order to clear WB, this page should be deleted. -- Juetho (discuss • contribs) 14:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

There is a lot of space for improvements, but we can't fix the main problem, the duplicate part. I think because of the duplicate part has got me voting delete. --atcovi (talk) 00:03, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete You're right.--Leaderboard 13:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Wikibooks:Undergraduate Mathematics/Expectation/Expected value

This page doesn't seem to belong to Wikibook as part of a book:

• It's part of the WB namespace, not the main namespace.
• It's mainly a duplicate of Wikibooks:Undergraduate Mathematics/Expected value.
• The page seems to be an import from w:Expected value. "Red links", templates, and interwiki links use Wikipedia, not Wikibooks.
• No other WB page links to that page.

The best way to use this page would be to move as chapter into Undergraduate Mathematics, format, and adapt as well as possible. If no one wants to do this, it's better to delete the page in order to clear WB. (If someone wants to use the page for the book in the far future, he is able to import the Wikipedia page again.) -- Juetho (discuss • contribs) 14:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Per above reasons look good enough for me to vote delete. --atcovi (talk) 00:04, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Delete Looks like a Wikipedia copy.--Leaderboard 13:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC)