Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Computer programming/Object oriented

Computer Programming/Object oriented
I found this with a speedy tag on. There is no way I would be able to delete it on that basis. The tag said "This book is awful as it stands and does not contribute anything that the object oriented programming book does not". I have no vote. Thanks -- Herby talk thyme 11:35, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - I agree with the speedy delete tagger. Webaware talk 12:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - I put the tag up and I believe the book is filled with spelling and grammatical mistakes and don't see any purpose for it, since the other book could easily be modified with any additional information that the author thinks is needed. There is no need to clutter up wikibooks with dupes. Jsdratm talk 1:38, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - If there is any useful information in Computer Programming/Object oriented (although it doesn't look like it to me) then it could be merged into Computer Programming/Object oriented programming. Mike.lifeguard 20:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Protest - as author of the book I protest against deletion of the book. I am still working on it. Even first chapter is not finished. So, you can't say whether it is good or not. See Talk:Computer programming/Object oriented for more information. alexsmail 15:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I moved the page to my home page domain to avoid deletion. I'll move back the page when first chapter will be complete. I suggest to dismiss this talk until first chapter will be accomplished. alexsmail 16:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge - whatever is possible and make sure the above author understands to make more positive contributions on existing pages and not new ones. -within focus 15:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

From Talk:Computer programming/Object oriented.

Functional Programming
I wanted to write my own book, but in completely different manner. I want to start from Functional Programming first. Can I begin my own book? I am new in wikibook... alexsmail 15:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If you don't intent into duplicate content creating a new book with a new approach and directed to a different audience is possible, but it will split the number of possible contributors Try to see if no one objects first to the changes (I've checked the history log for contributors and it seems the only registered users contributing content are User:Augustus.saunders and User:BillKress try posting a note on their talk page or directly contact them by email if available), give it a week if no one objects you can reshape the book, try to find another place/context to any content you will be removing if possible. See Be bold, and thanks for asking first... --Panic 19:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I have post note to their talk page. Why not to create another book on the same issue? I want to include Procedural Programming too as the basis. Every chapter will be look like: breaf description of the concept, real world example, sample example on Java, lengthly discussion with more sophisticated examples using C++ example to clarify two different implementation of the same concept (and highlight difference between concept and interface) and lengthly theoretical part. alexsmail 17:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * If you avoid a direct "collision" with a pre existing book, I don't think anyone will cause problems. You should also take a look into Forking policy, this is a draft of a policy, in there you may get a feeling on how some of the community feel about this type (if not exactly the same) situation, or take a look on the multiple books on C++.  --Panic 18:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I read about forking. In this case, it is ok. Because I want to introduce different approach. So, we can co-exist. alexsmail
 * I didn't get the answer from your contributors. alexsmail 11:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * reset

Ok if no one is working on it then you may decide to reshape the book or start a new one, you have given every chance to anyone to object to it, it is now up to you. --Panic 16:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)