Wikibooks:Requests for undeletion/Computer Programming/Language concepts

Computer Programming/Language concepts
Today the page Computer Programming/Language concepts was deleted . (What about Talk:Computer Programming/Language concepts?). As far as I can see, it was deleted without discussion. I'm not sure if this is connected to the Votes for deletion/Computer Programming debate.

I think that "language concepts" seems like a reasonable name for part of a book on computer programming. As far as I can tell, the content of that page was what Help:Etiquette calls "a good faith effort to start something useful." And so I think that page should be undeleted and perhaps listed on VfD. --DavidCary (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I remember a vfd for the deletion of the complete book (that IIRC failed). Can you place here any information if the same person/admin executed the deletion or if it was a request. Have you contacted the executor of the action before requesting the undeletion (since this is not a reversal of a vfd). If so I've always been of the opinion that the status quo rules over bold edits and that consensus means no stated opposition (that makes the last change non consensual by your opposition to it)... --Panic (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Is that a requirement to get a page undeleted?
 * If so, please edit the top of this page to add that requirement of which I was previously unaware.
 * "same person"? No. The links I already posted show that Adrignola deleted the page, while ( Votes for deletion/Computer Programming ) darklama started the VfD on the whole Computer Programming book, which was closed as keep.
 * "contacted" ? Hang on ... OK, I've dropped a note at User talk:Adrignola. --DavidCary (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Starting a request for undeletion means that you are asking if any Wikibookiane opposes the undeletion (even people that weren't aware or have a real involvement with the issue, it can even promote band wagoning if the subject is volatile), for what I remembered (correctly by the above reply) there wasn't a vfd validating the deletion and so a it falls into personal judgment that only fits a be bold edit action (deletion, moving or any edit per default goes under this category, if no reaching of consensus validated the action). In this case you are left objecting to a administrative action (deletion) that can easily be reverted (if people are in good will) or you can even be persuaded to agree with the deletion. In this case you would have only to address that one single user opinion/view on the issue...
 * Making a disagreement more visible that it merits can be a barrier to reach an commonly accepted outcome. I think it can be more agreeable and simpler to wait and see if User:Adrignola agrees with the reversal or you decide to drop the request after he explains his reasons for the action before this process proceeds any further. --Panic (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

'''This page was deleted on the 22 of June, not today. The VfD discussion closed on the 9 of July. This action was prior to closing.'''

A good deal of pages of Computer Programming have been merged with other books or moved into other books. The VfD ended as keep to allow for additional merging/moving or the development of the book further. This particular page only links to other books and did not have meaningful content at the time I deleted it. My goal at the time was to try to move/merge all the pages of Computer Programming and delete anything that did not have meaningful content. I somewhat agreed with Darklama's assessment of the book but did not want to delete the pages outright. This page was, in my opinion, an exception. You disagree (or maybe you'll agree upon viewing the page), so the page has been restored. -- Adrignola talk contribs 02:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)