Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Transwiki:Savoir-faire

Transwiki:Savoir-faire
Savoir-faire was transwikied from Wikipedia. The page is a "portal" aimed at achieving certain political and social goals. It would be counted as both an original research project and something far too broad to be a single book. (Do we really need a book to teach people: how to start fires, to fish, and "all other human need"?) MShonle 04:21, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, a half-hearted translation from a French project, and it's not a book, or at least not a book with a definable goal. Should be OK for wikicities though, but since there's no real content a transwiki is unnecessary. GarrettTalk 03:05, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * It was a portal on Wikipedia. That doesn't mean that we have to use it as originally intended.  Here it's clearly a bookshelf.  (The discussion in the Staff lounge completely misses the fact that not everything need be a book.)  It has content that could be usefully merged into the actual how-tos bookshelf itself.  (The external links and co-ordination sections are not useful.  But the classification and ideas for how-tos and layout certainly are.)  I suggested exactly that at Wikibooks talk:how-tos bookshelf. Keep. Uncle G 03:27:20, 2005-08-23 (UTC)
 * But bookshelves don't need all of that artwork, titles, and self promotion. You can enhance the how-to bookshelf right now if you want, it would have nothing to do with keeping or deleting this item. MShonle 03:39, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Wrong. It would have everything to do with it if the content is merged as I suggested.  Merger requires that edit history be preserved.  Uncle G 23:59, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * What steps are required to achieve what you'd like to see? --MShonle
 * Delete - It's just a page with a load of links to non-existent pages. What use is it? If Uncle G likes the layout, he can keep it for reference by moving it to a subpage of his user page (e.g. User:Uncle G/Savoir-faire) - Aya T E C 16:28, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Its use has already been explained above. Uncle G 23:59, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Combine with how-to bookshelf where appropriate and delete ... or ... create a "sub-bookshelf" of the how-to bookshelf to deal with this sort of content if the framework is considered important (think of it like a category). Kellen T 17:20, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Combine, as above 12.32.91.56 21:33, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - It is correct that this page is appropriate for Wikibooks, not Wikipedia. I have no problem with the images or external links. But no one here on Wikibooks is using the page! User:Uncle G fixed a few links, but there is no one updating the page to be a Wikibooks page (it still calls itself a Wikipedia portal) or writing most of the listed stuff. Delete it. Later if someone wants to write it, they can create page with blue links. --Kernigh 04:44, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - The reasons that I wrote above are not reasons for deletion. A stub full of red links is more than a dictionary-definition stub, thus by Deletion policy we should keep it. --Kernigh 19:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge - I put some ideas on Talk:Transwiki:Savoir-faire. After a merge, the module would not be deleted; it would become a redirect. --Kernigh 23:57, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I disagree. It might be full of red links, but it is not now, and will never be a book. It's some sort of project page, filled with original work and NPOV violations. At the very least it should be dumped at wikicities. --Whiteknight T C E 02:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete This is not a textbook, and is unlikely to become part of one. Juliusross 01:54, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not a txtbook. Mikkalai 18:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * ""Merge"" to bookshelf, seems self explanitory. - Nyarlathotep 17:20, 21 November 2005 (UTC)