Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Travels With Charley: In Search of America

Travels With Charley: In Search of America
The person who nominated this for deletion did not make an entry on this page. I disagree with the nomination. Please see Talk:Travels With Charley: In Search of America for further discussion. -- Stbalbach 21:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep and develop/expand into a bigger Study Guide. - Stbalbach 17:46, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - I was hoping to resolve this issue with user talk pages instead of getting to this forum, but OK. I nominated it for a speedy delete because it was mostly an exact word-for-word fork of a Wikipedia article and as such was a violation of Wikibooks policies.  I find it very unfortunate that the contributor here is being bullied by an admin on Wikipedia, and I strongly disagree with the rationale for reverting the addition of this material on that project.  Still, Wikibooks should not be a forum for content fights on Wikipedia and I was trying to suggest to these contributors that they resolve the issues on Wikipedia first, and then move it here if the discussion has come to some sort of conclusion. It might just become worthy of becoming a book study guide, and fit better on Wikibooks.  And if Wikipedia really doesn't want content like this, perhaps we can come to some sort of arrangement with Wikipedia to move stuff like that here, such as happened with some of the Cookbook recepies or the How-to books.  Please read my comments on the talk page for some further details about why I speedied this book module.  --Rob Horning 03:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - Well, as the creator of this content, I must say I'm exasperated! This site was created by 21 tenth graders.  It was an interdisciplinary course assignment where each group of three worked collaboratively through the use of weblogs to create each section.  I hoped it would provide a lesson in collaborative writing and researching and provide the whole class and others reading this book further insight into America in 1960 according to Steinbeck.  I could see this growing to include more references and material on a very interesting and transitional time in our history and culture.  I'm not sure if it serves better as a book or a pedia and I apologize for not understanding each of the site's purposes better.  My students use Wikipedia as a resource frequently and were excited about the prospect of building on their stub.  I think now my students are learning a very different lesson.  If you vote to keep it, I will take care of the image licensing problems and remove the discussion questons if you like.  --T McHale
 * I guess I'm confused here then. The study guide questions are fine, and indeed this is something that would be useful here on Wikibooks.  The issue here is that this was added to Wikipedia with the intent to make this into a Wikipedia article, and the content was then deleted by an administrator citing some sort of Wikipedia policy, mainly because he felt this was original research, and an editorial review of previously published material.  That is also banned on Wikibooks as well, so this certainly deserves a second look for this as well.  I don't think this is original research nor an editorial review, so I don't think that applies here, nor should it have applied on Wikipedia.
 * What I'm asking is if you really do intend to create this as a Wikibook, or is this simply being put here to avoid trying to have the content deleted from Wikipedia? The principle here is that Wikibooks should not be a battle ground for content disputes on Wikipedia.  If you and your students do learn a lesson, it is that there is a huge diversity of opinion in the world over what different philosophies and ideas mean to different people.  That and you need to realize that there are content standards to these projects so you can't put any random junk up on these Wikimedia projects and expect it to remain, unquestioned and unedited.
 * I'm trying to see in part what you want to do with this content and where do you want to go with it? If you want to turn it into a Wikipedia article, that is an option, but it is going to take some heavy editing to put it into the "Wikipedia" style.  Turning it into a Wikibook has a slightly different style, and a little more lattitude in terms of putting in study questions and other features that make it attractive to becoming a textbook.  As it is right now, this content is sort of halfway between both projects and really not ideal for either. --Rob Horning 14:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree Rob, and I hope we create both from this content - a Wikipedia article, and a Study Guide. I have started converting it into Wikipedia format, and hope T McHale and team continue building a Study Guide, they have more freedom and leeway here to do more things, than the more restrictive Wikipedia side of things. -- Stbalbach 16:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikibooks is not for editing Wikipedia articles. I understand that this book is here not as an expansion of an encyclopedia article, but because of a dispute related to Wikipedia:Travels With Charley: In Search of America. Tmchale and Stbalbach are both trying to improve the Wikipedia article now, and to help them improve Wikipedia, they are storing Travels With Charley: In Search of America at Wikibooks. This is well and good, except that Wikibooks is not an encyclopedia. I would have preferred that we edit the Wikipedia article at Wikipedia. Also consider Wikinfo, a project that allows forks of Wikipedia articles. --Kernigh 06:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)


 * This is an inaccurate portrayal and misunderstanding of what transpired. See my other comments this page. --Stbalbach 16:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Okay, since Stbalbach said that I was wrong, I will believe it for now. --Kernigh 16:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. As I understand the issue so far, the primary reason to delete is its Wikipedia origin.  But as a study guide, it is more appropriate here than there.  In general, forks from Wikipedia are a no-no.  But if the reason it was forked was that it was Wikibook material that didn't belong on Wikipedia, then surely that should count as an exception.  I have several concerns that could make me change my mind.  1) Perhaps I've missed somethng in the debate so far.  2) There were some concerns about its being a possible copywrite violation when this was at Wikipedia.  It appears that those concerns were successfully addressed before the material was transwikied.  But if it is a copywrite violation anyway, then that absolutely cannot be tolerated.  3) In general, I do not like the idea of Wikibooks becoming a repository for school projects.  That violates (or at least strongly risks violating) the "Wikibooks is not a free wiki host or webspace provider" of WB:WIW.  The result here is a high school level book report on what is probably Steinbeck's least enduring work.  We had another originally controversial school project here, the much better quality Engineering Acoustics.  I'm not ready to delete the book on that grounds yet, but seeing Wikibooks becoming a home for such projects is worrisome.  --JMRyan 09:02, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You are correct, that is what transpired. Someone uploaded Wikibooks material to Wikipedia, and so it was moved off Wikipedia. 2) There is no copyright violation the material is all original to Tmchale. 3) It is a general study guide, so long as it's generally applicable to anyone, I'm not sure it would matter who made it, so long as it's not specific to their school. -- Stbalbach 16:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Well this has been an interesting discussion and I've learned a lot, but I guess I still don't have a very good understanding of what qualifies as a wikipedia article and a wikibook. Yes, I guess right now this appears as a general study guide to "Steinbeck's least enduring work." But what makes this work interesting to is that it is nonfiction and represents the impressions of a distinctively American writer about his country during time (1960) of transition and great uncertainty. In that way, I'd like to see this site continue to expand the historical, cultural, and georgraphical observations that Steinbeck makes through hyperlinks and perhaps even disenting viewpoints from the time period. I'm not sure what it would become at that point (and I'm open to suggestions), but it seems to me that it's much more than a book report. -T McHale
 * To the extent that this is a reply to my vote above, remember that it was a "Keep" vote. As far as what qualifies for a Wikibook, well Travels With Charley: In Search of America for one does.  If I understand other posts correctly, the view that it does not qualify as a Wikibook was based on a mistaken view of what was there.  I did express some lack of enthusiasm for the book, but that is not the same as failing (or even almost failing) to qualify as a Wikibook.  I am unenthusiastic about the quality of the book.  But don't take that too seriously as I am unenthusiastic about the quality of many Wikibooks that clearly that qualify as per WB:WIW.  (I think downright silly books, some of which have survived VfD's, do not qualify to be Wikibooks, but I don't see this one as downright silly.)  Indeed, lesser quality books do sometimes grow up to become higher quality books.  I am sceptical and unenthsiastic about starting Wikibooks as class projects.  However, this scepticism applies more to the general practice of of creating Wikibooks as school projects than to any one such creation.  I guess I see it as a practice to be discouraged, not as a reason to delete existing books.  --JMRyan 20:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - I'm formally expressing support for this Wikibook, so far as it might become something really interesting. I would even encourage a more general Wikibook about John Steinbeck, where this would become but one "module" or chapter of that much larger book.  That is certainly something very worthy of Wikibooks, and there is plenty of content available to go that route while still maintaining a neutral point of view.  I know that sometimes it isn't really all that clear what a Wikibook really is about, and I apologize for that, and is something that the regulars to Wikibooks do need to clean up, especially from links on the Main Page.  I'll even try to wade in and clean up the page formatting if I can find the time.  --Rob Horning 16:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Removed vfd tag. I presume that this is kept because there are no "delete" votes left here. --Kernigh 21:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)