Wikibooks:Requests for deletion/Uniform Securities Agent State Law Exam

Uniform Securities Agent State Law Exam
Consists of only a single page that seems to me to be more appropriate for Wikiversity than for Wikibooks. --dark lama  16:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep as Stub - This is a book stub with a general outline. A study guide/textbook certainly is legitimate in this situation, and the section headers are basically straight off this professional license exam.  There really isn't anything else like this on Wikibooks, and this is something that IMHO should eventually be developed here in terms of having a book that would help with the preparation for this exam.  This is not intended to be the exam itself, but a study guide for the exam, such as a college entrance exam like the SAT or ACT exams given in the USA where similar study guides have been written.  Or think of a similar kind of study guide for those taking a Bar Exam.  --Rob Horning 22:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - accepting the "maybe a stub might bring someone" there really is nothing worthwhile here and it has not been actively edited for a year (barely then). Anyone wanting to write this will almost certainly start again -- Herby  talk thyme 10:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - I have nothing wrong with study guides, and I have no problem with someone outlining a subject. But this has been up for a rather long time. When there is clearly no one working on a textbook stub, whether we keep it or not depends on whether it has content. Should we keep something on the basis that it has material that will help future editors provide content? Perhaps, but this is an outline. Outlines can be useful for a new editor, other times, it can just be a needless restriction. For the reader browsing wikibooks, an outline really provides nothing at all. I'm reluctant to say delete, because the outline seems well-designed, but with no direction, no content, and ambiguous usefulness, this book doesn't seem like it needs to stay. -- Monk talk 18:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - it's a stub and so could be expanded. Being a stub is not grounds for deletion in my opinion. Xania [[Image:Flag_of_Poland_2.svg|15px]]talk 19:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete If its not being worked on, & is of little use to future contributors, kill it.--Dick 23:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * delete. Being a stub alone is not reason for a page to be deleted, this is true. However, being an abandoned stub with no active author, nothing for future editors to build upon, and little hope of ever becoming "not a stub" are good reasons all in favor of deletion. This book has not been edited in over a year, the author who started it has been absent for nearly that time as well. I find it highly unlikely also that anything here is worth salvaging for a future effort on this same subject. Having a stub like this around discourages new authors from starting their own books (they feel trapped into the currently existing book, if they can even find it) and discourages people from deviating from the outline already posted. Worse then being a stub, it's likely counter-productive to future book writing efforts. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)