Talk:SNFO Flight Planning

I removed the speedy delete tag for a couple of reasons:


 * 1)  This is not a trivial amount of content that is being requested to be deleted.  If it were just a single sentance or even a single paragraph that outlined the project, that would be one thing.  There is some actual content to this book, so it should go to a VfD if something this large is deleted.
 * 2)  Stubs are useful on Wikibooks, and this is a stub.  This page (SNFO Flight Planning:Philosophy of this project) spells out very clearly what the goals of this wikibook are, and is a very admirable goal.  Unfortunately trying to gather these materials is a very difficult task, and I understand why this project was abandoned.  What is needed instead is for this book to be indexed in such a way that other participants on Wikibooks can find this book.  Unfortunately it is not linked on any bookshelf and there is no real reason to even know it exists on Wikibooks at all.  If they happened to find it on Google, they might have come here, but that is a lousy way to find this content.  --Rob Horning 14:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Then transwiki it to Wikisource on the grounds that its a source text. The creator wants Wikibooks readers to basically copyedit the document found at, but a "work of the United States federal Government" released into the public domain is better suited for Wikisource. I hope you have this watched... --Hagindaz 17:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The goal was to do more than simply copy edit an existing document, but to also add in all of the errata, and updates as published. The problem with errata is that it is soothing for academic publishers as it shows their mistakes, but for somebody who has to use an advanced technical document for practical use it is practically a living nightmare.  And pilots are expected to know all of this, including the errata.  As a publication of the U.S. government, this is in the public domain, so there are no copyright issues here at all.  I'm really not sure if Wikisource can deal with a project of this nature or not, and that is an interesting question.  Can a "current document", updated to correct errata problems, be included in Wikisource?  It seems like a reasonable question.  It is a matter of how much of being a purist toward the original document it should get.


 * I think there was also the thought that additional "practical experience" from pilots would also be included in this manual... as perhaps a suppliment to or even a replacement of the manual that you cited. From this perspective, it is an interesting Wikibook as well.  I don't have the time to develop this Wikibook, but it would be something very interesting to see.  Perhaps some future editor/contributor to Wikibooks will want to take this from its current point and push it further.  I don't see a reason to remove this book at the moment, as it otherwise does fit with the reasons for Wikibooks as outlined on WB:WIN except for the original source material clause.  And in its current state it doesn't have enough source material to qualify for moving to Wikisource.  --Rob Horning 15:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)