Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Overcoming Procrastination

Overcoming Procrastination
I marked this book for speedy deletion...



... but then an anonymous user removed the "delete" tag and replaced it with an invisible comment...



Comparing Overcoming Procrastination to Procrastination, both pages are about the same. Wikibooks is not for forking or mirroring Wikipedia articles; Project:What is Wikibooks states that Wikibooks is not an encyclopedia and requires that forks of Wikipedia articles be expanded into books. The Wikibooks module has existed since 16 November 2005, and it remains the same length as the Wikipedia article. Unless someone wants to expand this (or remove content from Wikipedia), I suggest that we delete it. --Kernigh 03:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Move to How-to Bookshelf, either that or do something about this message on wikipedia: How-to and then delete. We really need to find a precise definition of wikibooks and advertise it, because obviously people at wikipedia don't understand the mission here. I guess this would fall under the "how to" section, but I'm really borderline here whether or not to delete. IMO, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia however. --Dragontamer 03:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. If it is an obvious fork of wikipedia content, then it is against policy to keep it here. Simply having a book stub available in case somebody else wants to expand it is just a homework assignment, and i can't condone that kind of nonsense. If you don't want to work on a book, don't create it blindly and expect other people to come in and do the work for you. Wikibooks community is too small for that kind of nonsense to work. I say we replace the page with a link to the wikipedia artical, and a note that the content can be expanded, and the book can be shelved on the how-to shelf. -- 04:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't see a movement at Wikipedia to delete the how-to aspects of Procrastination, but perhaps I missed it.  This article is just a fork of the Wikipedia article and so does not belong here unless the Wikipedia article is deleted or severely cut.  Note that the entire Wikipedia article was forked, not just the portions dealing with overcoming procrastination.  Note to Dragontamer&mdash;this book is already listed on the How-tos bookshelf.
 * Yes, you missed it. It's at w:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Overcoming procrastination. Uncle G 13:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Ahh, there were two articles over at Wikipedia, Procrastination and Overcoming procrastination. Our Overcoming Procrastination looks like Procrastination.  Wikipedia has already deleted Overcoming procrastination, so I couldn't compare ours with that one.  Did they transwiki the wrong article??? --JMRyan 19:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes. But the right one was a subset of the wrong one. Uncle G 01:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Not primarily because this is a fork, but because this is a transwikification that doesn't comply with the GFDL (that there is no apparent reason to fix), delete. Uncle G 13:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't understand. Why doesn't the transwikification comply with GFDL?  (It's not that I doubt you, it's just that I don't know the issue[s] involved.) --JMRyan 19:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, i don't understand either :-/ --Dragontamer 20:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The GFDL requires that author information and a back-link be attached to the copied article. See some of the many articles listed at Special:Contributions/Uncle G's 'bot for one way that this is done.  One could fix the article at hand.  But there's no apparent reason to do so. Uncle G 01:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The GFDL, section 4 "modifications", letter I, requires that we preserve the history of the authors, publishers, titles, and years published of a book. One can satisfy that requirement by linking to the Wikipedia article. That is unless Wikipedia deletes their article, in which case we need to copy the history like Uncle G's 'bot does. --Kernigh 01:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The back-link is necessary, regardless. See the oft-overlooked section 4.J.  Uncle G 12:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Why can't these just be in the public domain? :-( Life would be soooo much easier. Then again, we wouldn't be guarenteed recongnition.--Dragontamer 13:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * -- Anonymous User -- Please, if you do delete it from Wikipedia, make sure it is still accessible to internet users, because it has already been of help to myself and others, and could be useful to more! is there a self-help (though I despise that term) section of Wikipedia? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.41.105.247 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * This place is not wikipedia. We are not wikipedia admins (although one or two may be), and we don't have any control over what happens at wikipedia. So why are you asking us Wikipedia questions? This place is wikibooks--Dragontamer 20:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You can read it at Procrastination. We are not deleting that, we are only discussing the deletion of an extra copy of it at Wikibooks: Overcoming Procrastination. --Kernigh 01:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It gives helpful information which would take time to find otherwise, thus it serves a purpose. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.221.226.254 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 6 January 2006 (UTC).
 * Keep. This doesn't belong on Wikipedia, and has been deprecated there, according to Uncle G. It's a valuable text, and seems to fit wikibooks' charter.  I vote: sort out the GFDL transwiki issue and keep it. Irrevenant 10:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep it. maybe by the very nature of this article users who find it usefull aren't prione for a speedy rewrute to a book format ,but again ,this does not mean deletion is imperative. the paragraph explaining and definfing the term itself can be removed though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.228.139.203 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep this is a useful content for wikibooks. It's a guide, and that's what Wikibooks is.--Ichiro 19:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * comment. According to Uncle G, all the information from the (now deleted) Overcoming procrastination has now been merged into Procrastination. If the wikipedia people are going to delete all the How-to information in that article, I want to keep (the only copy of) it here at wikibooks. But if it's going to stay at wikipedia, I want to delete the redundant information here at Overcoming Procrastination. --DavidCary 01:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Regardless of whether it's on Wikipedia or not, the point is, it should be here. It's an instructional text.  I say sort out the transwiki snafu and keep it, regardless of what wikipedia do. Irrevenant 09:34, 19 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The self-help content is probably better placed at wiki books than at Procrastination. Since everybody is doing no work on it, maybe it's effective - people may look at it, then stop putting off what they should be doing. In a desperate fit of stalling, I did insert a positive filter, so I guess I'm not everybody. I hadn't realized the whole thing was hijacked. I can understand Uncle G's vote for deletion. Wikipedia:User:Metarhyme - Whoops, yesterday they stopped putting off dealing with it at wikipedia...maybe that will happen also at wikibooks...in the fullness of time? Morgen morgen nur nicht heute sagen alle faulen leute - still, who knows?
 * Keep - per above note, I'm no longer neutral Wikipedia:User:Metarhyme 12 March 2006
 * Delete. See wikipedia:talk:procrastination for background on this. I didn't know that this page existed, and I wanted the content to be cleaned up and expanded before being transwikied here. Pianoman87 11:15, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
 * There's a lot on that page you linked to, and I'm not sure which bit you're referring to. Regardless, my point remains that the content is educational in nature and belongs here. I agree the transwikification (re: licencing requirements) should be fixed, but the text can be cleaned up here.  It makes little sense to leave it where it's off-topic to clean up. Irrevenant 11:04, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Some form of the book belongs on the how-to shelf. Not sure how much of the current content is salvageable. Sj 19:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The situation has changed, and the procrastination article is substantially different to the version here. I'd strike out my vote, but there have been replies to it - so consider it changed to keep now. Pianoman87 11:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep on the self-help bookshelf. Sj 04:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

NOTE: The Procrastination Enty in Wikipedia has been reverted to an earlier state that no longer overlaps with the material found in the "Overcoming Procrastination" wikibook.


 * Keep it. While not in the best format, I believe that this entry is valuable to those seeking help in this area.  As well, it fills a niche of information that the Wikipedia entry cannot fill.--P-Chan 08:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And you linked the gutted 'pedia how-to to the full 'books how-to, so save. Wikipedia:User:Metarhyme 12 March 2006


 * Keep I find it a bit ironic that the "booklet" on Overcoming Procrastination is being considered for deletion -- have patience with the procrastinators who haven't got around to working on it! Since there is no longer any overlap with the Wikipedia article, I think it is VERY important to keep this document. Wikipedia:User:Alan_J_Shea 10:35 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - But transwiki the complete-historied version from Wikipedia, to be in accordance with GFDL. --24.18.171.99 23:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree. The historied version from Wikipedia is more complete than the one here. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Procrastination&direction=prev&oldid=43262142

So we may want to transwiki that one instead.--P-Chan 06:49, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Keep. May we remove the "vote for deletion" notice, please? It fills my heart with fear each time I see it (I speak more as a user of the material than as a contributer - but that still makes me a "stakeholder"). --New Thought 11:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

'''Kept. Removed vfd tag.''' The reason for deletion is now obsolete. I also posted to Talk:Overcoming Procrastination. --Kernigh 20:08, 15 March 2006 (UTC)