Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Japanese/Q&A

Japanese/Q&A
Speedy Delete: Unmaintained; Empty; see Requests for deletion/Python Programming/Q&A & Requests for deletion/Chess/Q&A --33rogers (talk) 16:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Symbol comment vote.svg Comment given the obsolescence warning and the fact that speedy deletion of the page was challenged I wouldn't consider it as unmaintained. I don't see the need of external interference through an RfD in this case. --Duplode (talk) 17:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Symbol keep vote.svg Keep As the note on the page indicates, it is obsolete and therefore there is no need to maintain it. The book is undergoing restructuring as evident from the discussion on Talk:Japanese (where there is a section for proposing page deletions, by the way). The page will be deleted in due course, but there is no need to do so at this point.
 * This page, just as the rest of the Japanese and related wikibooks, is under the watchful eye of User:Retropunk and myself. If you'd like to join the ongoing work on that book, please read up on the discussion on the main page talk page, check the Japanese/Contributor's Guide and pick a task. --Swift (talk) 00:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * There is already consensus from Requests for deletion/Python Programming/Q&A that Wikipedia's Reference desk is the correct place for asking questions. The page has no useful content and I ask that it be deleted (speedy delete). --33rogers (talk) 04:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to post any questions you have while learning or encountering Japanese.
 * Furthermore, the only content on the page was:
 * --33rogers (talk) 04:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Symbol keep vote.svg Keep. If the book being is actively restructured, the contributors placed a very clear obsolescence warning and didn't request speedy deletion themselves there is no reason to be concerned about this page. It costs nothing to mention that the page is currently empty merely because old questions - all timely answered, BTW - were moved to Archive 1. --Duplode (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Swift has been long involved with the Japanese book. If he feels it should be kept I see no reason not to agree with one of the books contributors. Thenub314 (talk) 16:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)