Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Project+

Project+
{| cellspacing="5" cellpadding="5" style="border: 1px red solid; background: #ffffcc; width: 95%; margin: auto;" | style="width: 40px; text-align: center;" | | Closed as keep. The content has been clarified regarding what it is about, and what has been added has been turned into a better organized outline. There is no reason to continue this VfD. --Rob Horning 23:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC) |- | colspan="2" style="border-top: 1px red dashed;" |

This book was nominated for speedy deletion by User:Robert Horning, and that nomination was contested by the only active contributor to this book. I have changed the nomination from a speedy delete to a VfD, and we can discuss the matter here. For the record, I am opposed to deletion, and this nomination should not be counted as a vote in the affirmative. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 00:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak delete All I see is a page of bullet points with no explanation of what the terms mean or what the headings mean. Even the sentences that follow the bullet points are not really sentences.  Unless this book can be quickly improved into regular book format with sentences and explanations then I would agree with Robert that it should be deleted.  What were Robert's reasons for deletion though? Xania [[Image:Flag_of_Italy.svg|15px]]talk 20:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The book is just over a week old right now, and it was nominated for deletion when it was only 3 days old. How high can you expect the quality of a book to be in three days? --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 20:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 * How long ago was the speedy contested? If recently I'd say let the primary author have the time to fix it up. Mattb112885 (talk) 20:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The book was created on 24 May, it was nominated for speedy by Rob on 27 May, and it was contested on 31 May. It's all a very short timeframe. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 20:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - just looks like someone's personal exam notes. Webaware talk 07:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - The reasons I listed for deleting this page (it really isn't even a book) was that it appeared to me as a violation of WB:WIW by using Wikibooks as a webhosting site, posting some personal exam notes and otherwise not really a serious effort to create a textbook. If I thought it was complete trash, I simply would have pressed the "delete" tab and have been done with it.  Instead, I felt that the "author" needed to be aware of Wikibooks policies and I did want to see what the author intended to accomplish with this book proposal.  That this particular author is insisting on remaining anonymous by using multiple IP addresses and accounts (I don't see obvious sock puppetry, however) has made it quite a bit more difficult to communicate with this individual.  I would have normally made a quiet comment on the user talk page instead of going this route... and I did consider this page to be a deletion candidate for many of the reasons listed above.  I do want to give this author some time to develop this book, if that is what his intention really is going to be, although I don't see with his tone and attitude that he will respond favorably to somebody else editing the content of that page either.  --Rob Horning 12:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Transwiki - to Wikiversity. Exam notes would be more appropriate at Wikiversity. --Remi 15:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Having taken a look at the modules I agree with User:Remi. Should not be deleted but it would be better served at wikiversity. Mattb112885 (talk) 01:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Week keep - I don't see the difference between exam notes and study guides. If anyone is willing to rewrite this into a real textbook, I see no strong reason to delete it. Hoogli 16:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind that this was turned into a textbook, although I would like to know about what topic it is addressing, and not to find that information from a heated discussion on the talk page. In reading just the page content, I just scratch my head and wonder what the goals of the books are.  Apparently it is supposed to be a test study guide, but I wouldn't have been able to tell that from just reading the outline.  My question would be, if I'm reading this page as a stub, can I possibly expand this topic into something more detailed and actually add some prose to the page?  How could I add content as an "expert" if I can't even figure out what it is about?  --Rob Horning 19:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You're requiring that three days into the book's lifespan that it should have a fully intelligible definition and scope. We have never required books must attain any specific milestones in any timeframe. The deletion policy gives new books a seven day grace period specifically because we dont want to be deleting a perfectly legitimate book just because it's gotten off to a rocky start. An author of a new book has enough to worry about in the first few days without having to also fend off a VfD. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 22:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Not at all. But I would like anything added to Wikibooks to at least let somebody else be able to edit the content in a coherent manner that can add value to the original content.  And I will say it again, I did not delete this page.  I asked for review of this content instead, and perhaps a markup tag that is more along the lines of "What is this?" should be used (next time I come across content like this, I'll do that instead) instead of the speedy delete tag.  And mind you, I did not force this into a VfD.  The deletion tag simply could have been removed instead of blowing this whole discussion on this page.  After I got the attention of the "original author", I nearly removed the speedy delete tag myself.  I did question the legitimacy of this page, and am still not sure if it belongs on Wikibooks.  --Rob Horning 20:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * keep This is a useful outline for a textbook on the Project+ certification and provides a useful framework for the development of a book about the same. -- xixtas talk 23:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Comments
I'll put it here for good order & peace! I fully agree with Rob that there could/should be a halfway house between deletion process & keeping. My intention with this section was exactly that and I would have probably listed Project+ as well as Desires & Inner self (above) there. Probably not speedies but certainly warranting the community's attention. I'd love to see that aspect of the page, at least, be used. -- Herby talk thyme 07:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Knowledge Assasins
Its a perfect example of a potentially high quality textbook many can learn a lot from, in early stages of its evolution. It is being assasinated by unbalanced opinions on your part, or lack thereof, on the part of the current version of the book, before it had the chance to sprout enough for a whiter shade of pale green. --[User:Ohadaloni|Ohadaloni]] 19:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)


 * }