Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/21am/Management Tools

21am/Management Tools
21am/Management Tools/iCash looks like it's just a plug for some software. If it gets deleted, then there will be nothing left of merit in 21am/Management Tools, so this can be deleted too, Jguk 18:02, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment. I don't see that deleting 21am/Management Tools/iCash should lead to the deletion of 21am/Management Tools. Deleting the former would leave the latter with no information. However, 21am/Management Tools is a stub that persumably fits appropriately into its parent's structure. What I can't figure out, though, is why the entire book 21am shouldn't be deleted. Not that it's obvious to me that it should be deleted&mdash;it's rather that I'm confused by the thing. It's an almost no-content book, and I can't figure out what 21am is or whether it is a subject on which we can build a book. Is it a software program, possibly one in development? Is it an accounting strategy or technique? Is it anything at all? Googling "21am" did not help. I left a message on the primary author's talk page. Maybe he can tell us enough about what 21am is so that we can figure out whether there is a book in the making there. --JMRyan 19:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment AM is apparently Arts Management. 21 is 21st century.  Boo on the title.  Waaaay too catch phrasey for me.  Assuming arts management is a useful topic (it seems like it may belong on the business bookshelf, not the arts), I'd prefer to see it renamed to something more descriptive, and without the 21st century unless something dractic changed right at the stroke of midnight 2000 that completely changed the entire field.  --Gabe Sechan 20:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Kept - As there has doesn't appear to be a burning desire to really make any changes with this content, and (surprisingly) no strong opinions in any direction as to what should happen with this content, I'm declaring this a failed VfD. The Wikibook 21am is linked to the Arts bookshelf. While it may have problems, it needs more TLC and somebody simply wanting to get involved with the content trying to get it going. --Rob Horning 10:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)