Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Engineering Tables

Engineering Tables
This is not a book, more like a collection of tables. Should either be deleted or moved to userspace.
 * Wikibooks=PokestarFan*Talk*Contributions|#default=|Wikibooks=PokestarFan*Talk*Contributions|#default= PokestarFan*Talk*Contributions  }}}} 14:11, 9 April 2017 (UTC)


 * That material is transcluded in multiple other books. They're book content so they belong in a content space, not in userspace (which is for single-owner non-content) nor even in project space or template space (which are multi-owner but still non-content).  They're shared by multiple books so they don't really belong in any one of those books.  The collection seems a reasonable solution.  I'm open to alternative ways to host the material, though the main problem I see is with the wording of the introduction (which maybe I'll try to tweak, now [&zwj;✅]).  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 16:27, 9 April 2017 (UTC)


 * A well-organised collection of tables can make for a perfectly useful Engineering handbook. --Duplode (discuss • contribs) 10:09, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * deletion. It looks well written.--Jusjih (discuss • contribs) 02:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol merge vote.svg Merge Contents of this book useful for other books should be merged there as appendices. This book is not an instructional resource, only a mere reference, and therefore is not in the scope of Wikibooks as described in WIW (although not explicitly).  Also, such content fits better the scope of Wikipedia, where such collection is possible there with the book creator.  --Strange quark (discuss • contribs) 03:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * They're being used as appendices now; it's just that there happen to be multiple books that use them, and all the tables are being kept in one place. Logically, if the material is so suitable for books that it's used in several of them, that can't make it less suitable for books, presumably.  Wikipedia isn't an in-depth reference; that's part of the point of an encyclopedia, that it covers everything but in less depth than books on the various subjects would.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 11:04, 21 June 2017 (UTC)