Wikisource

Wikisource:Proposed deletions/Archives/2006-03

< Wikisource:Proposed deletions‎ | Archives
(Redirected from Wikisource:Proposed deletions/Archives/2006/03)
Warning Please do not post any new comments on this page.
This is a discussion archive first created in , although the comments contained were likely posted before and after this date.
See current discussion or the archives index.

Deleted

This header exists to simplify archival. Please list deleted entries below.

User:Primetime/Labyrinth of Solitude

This text was deleted as a copyright violation (Wikisource:Possible copyright violations#Labyrinth of Solitude), then restored and moved to the user's space for transwiki purposes. It should be deleted again for the same reasons in a day or two. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 22:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Deleted. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 06:50, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Author:James Thurber

Has no works (they're all still under copyright). As such, his page doesn't really contribute anything.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Delete - having this here will only encourage folk to add his works. AllanHainey 12:43, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Author:Kurt Vonnegut

Another author whose works aren't PD.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Delete - comments as above. AllanHainey 12:44, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Humanist Manifesto III

External link only.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Hernani (drama)

This page begins as a poor, likely machine, translation and then the remainder is in French. --Gavroche 17:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Domestic Medical Practice

This work has been abandoned. No source to fill out what we currently have can be found. Since the work is horribly incomplete, I propose we delete all of its subpages as well:

—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Humanism

Contains no works (they've all been blanked/deleted for copyright reasons).—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Author:L. L. Zamenhof

Only external links to Esperanto works.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 21:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

{{translate}} , Category:Translate

I think these are redundant with the new transwiki templates. Editors are free to translate works transwikied to another language Wikisource, but tagging works with translation instead of transwiki templates invites severe and eternal backlog. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 03:16, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Author:Octavio Paz

The author died in 1998; he never released copyright within my knowledge, so none of his works will be free for a while. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 22:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

A History of Chess

No actual content. Just a copy of the table of contents that is found on the page (linked at bottom of article) which is actually selling the book.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:DEPO ZhuE 031110 TRANSCRIPT.pdf

I think this file is messed up. The first is alright and then over 200 litle white squares???? I'm not sure what it even is.

Author:Fernando Pessoa

Meaningless content.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 04:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I have identified the content as in Portuguese. If not translated to English, it should be moved to Portuguese Wikisource.--Jusjih 09:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
This should be transwikied to the Portugese Wikisource and deleted. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 18:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Deleted, already exists on the Portugese Wikisource. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 11:34, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Author: Andrei Lubensky

The articles Author: Andrei Lubensky and Author:Andrei Lubensky both refer to the same author. Note the space after the colon in the first page name. The first article contains only information available on Wikipedia at Andrei Lubensky. I believe the second article should be the one kept. This might qualify for a speedy delete.--Droll 05:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

OTH Lamo Transcript 20040407

This is an incomplete transcript and I believe that we need to refuse such things or we will run into the problem POV slanted excerpts. Whether a POV opinion being adressed by selecting some comments over others in this case I do not know, but feel we need to exclude all documents that are "selections" from WS editors. Here is a quote from the document itself where claims to incomplete: The transcript below is concentrated on Lamo's comments, with other remarks inserted briefly to maintain the context of the conversation

  • Delete--BirgitteSB 20:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Transcribing an entire two-hour radio show is unfeasible. The transcriber excerpted my interview, because the intent was to have it add context to my article. The transcript reflects the full text of interactions involving me during the course of this interview. As such, I'm not sure how there could be a POV issue. This is more analogous to a video clip skipping commercials than any kind of condensed POV-push. Abstain from voting, though. Adrian Lamo ·· 22:36, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
I do not accuse you of POV-pushing, but rather oppose this on the principle of limiting Wikisource to complete texts. Many texts we host are POV (i.e. The White Man's Burden), our only defence is that by hosting entire texts none of the POV comes from Wikisource editors. How are we to to know if someone is POV pushing or not when we don't know what was cut out? I think the only answer is to insist on complete texts. --BirgitteSB 02:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I reiterate my commercial analogy. It's counterintuitive to include every unrelated sentence of an item, not unlike insisting on a full issue of a newspaper or magazine rather than a relevant article.
I do understand your desire to be equitable in terms of handling content. Do bear in mind that procedure should follow circumstance and sense, though. Not the other way around.
I don't know how Wikisource handles content, as this isn't my primary Wikimedia project. I sure think it wouldn't make much sense to delete this content and end up with nothing at all for readers in re. this interview, but it's your call, per your local procedures.
I'm curious, however. If the nice fellow who transcribed this had called it "Conversation between Adrian Lamo and Emmanuel Goldstein on 04-07-04," would it then be complete, and thus keepable, since it includes all words spoken by the both of us? :)
Cheers.
Adrian Lamo ·· 03:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
From reading the introduction it seems more than commercials were cut out. I don't really know (which is my problem with this), but it seems other people's comments that the transcriber believed irrelevent to what Adrian Lamo was saying were cut out. I am working that out from my interpretaions of this line The transcript below is concentrated on Lamo's comments, with other remarks inserted briefly to maintain the context of the conversation. If this had been put on Wikisource without the introduction, it might have taken longer to be noticed as an incomplete text. However that would not have made it any more comlplete as a source. I just don't think Wikisource is the place for this.--BirgitteSB 03:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I always prefer to have complete texts but in most cases don't feel that it is necessary to delete them if they are abridged in some way. We have a number of abridged speeches but they are noted & categorised as such so they can be completed when the full text becomes available. In this case I feel that is unlikely to happen as the full transcript/recording will only be in the possession of the interviewer or his tv or radio station.
The transcript (& I haven't read all of it) appears to be coming down on the side of Adrian Lamo, which is to be expected as the tv/radio programme is focussing on him from a specific POV. I don't know whether if we had the whole of the text of the interview it would make any difference to that (& like you Birgitte I have a problem with not knowing this) but I feel that as long as what we do have is what went out on the air we can continue to keep it, provided that we note that it is a transcript not of the interview but of the interview as broadcast & that as such it has been edited from the actual discussions. If however the whole 2 hour interview was broadcast & this is just excerts of it the we should delete this as we're never likely to get the missing parts. AllanHainey 12:57, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
What right do we have to even post this? If this is an interview between Adrian Lamo and a radio station, the station will own all copyrights of the interview. We'll first have to have their permission to post it. I echo Birgitte and Allan's comments about having only excerpted parts (or what appear to be excerpted parts), but first I'm concerned about whether this can even be on our servers or not.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

National anthem of the Kingdom of Lovley

I'm not sure about this one. It's the 'national' anthem of a 'country' made up by a British comedian for a BBC programme. AllanHainey 13:05, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I'll email King DW 1 about copywrite.81.77.43.112 14:22, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Treaty of Ghent

Somewhat random, just cheers for the user's favorite team.--Politicaljunkie 21:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Spring Offensive

No relevance, just "lol".--Politicaljunkie 21:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Mrs. Warren's Profession

There isn't any description of the play, just "This stinks... i need this play."--Politicaljunkie 21:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Quran 99:1

This reads more like a soapbox comment than anything constructive.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Aeneid, Book II

The same reasons apply as above, although this book is by a different user.--Politicaljunkie 22:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening

There is already a page, Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening, that is more detailed (having a table giving background information) yet has the same poem by Robert Frost.--Politicaljunkie 22:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

USA PATRIOT Act, Title I

There is already a page, USA PATRIOT Act/Title I, that contains the same information, yet is better formatted and linked to the other titles.--Politicaljunkie 22:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

EB1911:Adolph of Nassau

Content: "I know nothing about this!"--Politicaljunkie 22:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Atlantic hurricane best track

I don't think this falls within wikisource's purview, & frankly I think it will make no sense to anyone save an expert. AllanHainey 13:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Carta de Jamaica

Only content is "Hola, aqui no hay la carta de jamaica sorry"

Bangladesh Victims of September 11, 2001 Attacks

Another list.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 18:49, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal observations of Great Lakes storm of November 9, 1913

No text in the article.--Politicaljunkie 03:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Karl Pilkington

Seems to be a list of jokes, mostly concerning monkeys. Delete - AllanHainey 13:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

A list of an entertainer's comediac material *Keep - Mitchell Stirling 09:04 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Category:John Maclean

Empty category. We should probably discourage the use of author-specific categories, as well.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

PORTRAITS OF PASSION

Not sure exactly what it is, --Politicaljunkie 02:47, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete. The page consists entirely of external links for a work published in 1997, and thus likely copyrighted. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy deleted, since the pages have no content (only links to external websites). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

UNKNOWN HORIZONS

Same as above, also by the same user.--Politicaljunkie 00:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, since the pages have no content (only links to external websites). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

LOVE AND PRIDE

Same applies as above, also by same user.--Politicaljunkie 00:38, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, since the pages have no content (only links to external websites). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

POLICING THE POLICE LINKS

By the same user as above, it was "published ... in 2000."--Politicaljunkie 00:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, since the pages have no content (only links to external websites). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

POLICING FOR THE NEW AGE

Consists of external links for a work published in 1992, and thus likely copyrighted. (By the same user as above)--Politicaljunkie 00:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, since the pages have no content (only links to external websites). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

POLICING FOR THE NEW AGE LINKS

Consists of external links for a work published in 1992, and thus likely copyrighted.(By the same user as above)--Politicaljunkie 00:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, since the pages have no content (only links to external websites). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

TALK:The Call of Cthulhu

Content: "who exactly is Cthulhu?? Read the story, moron."--Politicaljunkie 00:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

The Origin of Species, Chapter 6 - Difficulties Of The Theory

Talk:A Poison Tree

Content:"I think this is the coolest poem ever Reading Journals 4eva. I second the movement and demand a refund!"--Politicaljunkie 22:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

The U.S. constitution is already up.--Politicaljunkie 22:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Earth Simulator

It seems like a person ranting about a certain site.--Politicaljunkie 21:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The Wiliad

This is, as the description says, a version of the Iliad "adapted or altered however anyone wants to". Comparing Book 1 of the Wiliad to Book 1 of the proper Iliad already on Wikisource, there are minor word changes that are just made up by the user. Also falling under this umbrella would be The Wiliad - Book I.--Politicaljunkie 02:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Cool Air

Content: "yeah um... copyright? er huh... yeah err btw he's dead... uh.. yeah ...huh" --Politicaljunkie 02:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom/Chap 7

Content: "telepresence" --Politicaljunkie 02:17, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:The Giving Tree

Content: "Does anyone know the moral to this story? Yeah, I think it's Don't be greedy or else you'll lose everything" --Politicaljunkie 02:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus

Content: "<-------- Hey look there's an iceberg...Why are we talking about Christmas things in September?"--Politicaljunkie 13:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:How Brigadier Gerard Lost His Ear

Redundant compared to How Brigadier Gerard Lost His Ear.--Politicaljunkie 20:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, as it's a near-identical copy of the article page. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:Plays and Musicals & Wikisource talk:Plays and Musicals

Content: "It's Christmas in July." Then, there's a link on the discussion page to an external site.--Politicaljunkie 00:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Aeneid, Book X

There is already an Aenid Book X at this link which is a part of a formatted section, unlike this page which is hanging by itself.--Politicaljunkie 21:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

They seem to be different versions or translations of the same text. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
It says "translated by Chris", so I'm not sure how reliable the translation is.--Politicaljunkie 02:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete; Google returns no matches for this translation, except for the Wikisource page. I don't see any reason to keep an apparently amateur translation when we have a public domain professional translation. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Deleted.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 14:42, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:The Vision of Mirza

Near identical copy of the article page.--Politicaljunkie 01:21, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[[Talk:Author:Robin Cook]]

Redudant compared to Speech on the Government's Ethical Foreign Policy.--Politicaljunkie 01:27, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I've moved it to Robin Cook's Speech on the London Bombings as it isn't infact his ethical foreign policy speech. AllanHainey 13:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:The Analects

Just says hello.--Politicaljunkie 21:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC) Delete as it does nothing for us. Apwoolrich 12:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Delete - AllanHainey 13:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

YTMND soundtrack

I marked for speedy delete because content is meaningless. --Inge 09:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Statement for reconstructing Is

Now that there's no article page, the talk page is unnecessary.--Politicaljunkie 18:16, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Love Songs

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 18:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

La dama de Chorrillos

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 20:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Author:Gary Kirk

Not an author. Content was "See me on Wikipedia.". AllanHainey 12:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Category:Laws of Singapore

Singaporean governmental works are copyrighted for 70 years since publication pursuant to Section 197 of the Copyright Act of Singapore. Even laws published on 9 August 1965, the independence day from Malaysia, will remain copyrighted until the end of 2035.--Jusjih 12:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Deleted, as it's empty and unlikely to be used. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:What Christmas Is as We Grow Older

Broken link. --Politicaljunkie 16:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Delete - AllanHainey 13:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The Frost Giant's Daughter

Same as Gods of the North, maybe a redirect would be good.--Politicaljunkie 16:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:The Great Stone Face

Content: "i need help seeing all of the sybolism in The Great Stone Face. I have to write a literary Analysis on it. please help. email me at msuttle@sagu.edu - thank you  : )" --Politicaljunkie 18:17, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Pyrrho

External link.--Politicaljunkie 22:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Patriot Act

There is already the complete Patriot Act at USA PATRIOT Act.--Politicaljunkie 22:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Tubeone

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 22:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

User talk:205.221.222.253

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 22:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:The Anteater

Marked as speedy delete.--Politicaljunkie 22:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

White Flag

Marked as speedy delete.--Politicaljunkie 22:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Author:Eoin Colfer

Author:Valerie Solanas

Has no meaningful content. --Droll 06:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Lanny the Lizard

Non-meaningful content?--Politicaljunkie 22:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

It is meaningful content. It's an unformatted haiku, possibly of Indian origin. I can't find any information on the author, so it may have to be deleted regardless. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Deleted; no authorship information, unverifiable. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Botanical Description of Nepenthes rajah

This is compiled from two different sources, one of which is under copyright. It is not clear which section is from which source, nor is it clear if they are verbatim from the source or are paraphrases, summaries, etc., (like what would be found in an encyclopedia).—Zhaladshar (Talk) 14:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Strong Keep Hi. This descirption is not verbatim from the sources, it is simply information taken from the two sources which I have combined and written in my own words. The information in the book is presented in a completely different format (e.g. "lamina oblong-lanceolate, <80 cm long, 15 cm wide") whereby sentences are not even used. I do not believe it is copyright violation as I have simply used the facts from the source to write a description, I have not actually copied a single line out of the book. This page is as much a violation of copyright as the wikipedia article that it supports (which is in the category "good articles" btw). I think this should be kept as it adds to an already very detailed and rich article in the main encyclopedia. Mgiganteus1 21:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
The problem is that Wikisource only collects sources, not works compiled from multiple sources and then rewritten. We take works that directly match previously published works and present them free online. Since this is not previously published material, but is more a derivative of previously published material, it would be more appropriate for an encyclopedia and not a library of source texts.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 22:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
Alright then. In that case should I make a separate wikipedia article and copy it there do you think? This cannot be included in the main article as it contains far too much technical terminology and would stick out like a sore thumb, nonetheless it contains very useful data that should be kept somewhere. Mgiganteus1 23:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I have moved it to wikipedia. This page can now be deleted. Thanks. Mgiganteus1 23:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

The Bad Beginning

The book is under copyright.--Politicaljunkie 22:17, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Deleted, since it has no content besides a one-line description of a plot detail. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:18, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Beginning of Bible

More from User:216.220.231.226. Probably qualifies for speedy delete. It might just qualify for deletion because it is unpublished. --Inge 02:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Bambi

And more from User:216.220.231.226. --Inge 02:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Author:Kurt Vonnegut

Might qualify for speedy delete because there is no meaningful content. --Inge 05:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Jamaican National Anthem

Request for speeedy delete (G7). Unneeded redirect after page move. Opps. I created it. --Inge 06:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Deleted per your request.--Jusjih 14:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Jamaica, Land we Love

Request for speeedy delete (G7). Opps, Opps! Already exists as Jamaica, Land We Love. I created the page I want deleted. --Inge 06:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Deleted per your request.--Jusjih 14:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Carnell Breeding

Normally I would say to shift it to Wikipedia, but it seems as if the user wrote the page about himself.--Politicaljunkie 01:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Penguins

When I searched for this poem on Google, I found out that the poem comes from a site which contains poems and stories written by first-graders. I'm not sure if it's a copyright violation or if it should be deleted for other reasons.--Politicaljunkie 01:55, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[[Talk:Author:Frank Herbert]]

The author page is gone, no need for the talk page.--Politicaljunkie 20:49, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

The Value of Home Security Safes

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 21:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Neues Tagebuch der Kaffeerunde

German gibberish.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 19:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The Wise Old Owl

Still more from User:216.220.231.226. --Inge 02:15, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

  • This one might be alright. This is only a part of the full poem. We can add the rest. The only thing that concerns me is the fact that since the author is unknown and I can't tell when it was published, it might still be eligible for copyright.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 14:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete; unknown author, only one unique result on Google excluding Wikisource, unverifiable. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy deleted, criteria for speedy deletion A2 (Non-notable content). // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 16:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

My Life

And more. Maybe this user needs some preventative help. --Inge 02:23, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Presdent William Jefferson Clinton Speech

It's not really a speech, but rather just a few lines cobbled together. --Politicaljunkie 21:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Speech for Dems

Same as above. --Politicaljunkie 22:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Clinton Lewinsky Apology

Non-meaningful content. --Politicaljunkie 22:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Spider

Non-meaningful content. --Politicaljunkie 22:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Raizan

Another by 130.111.98.244, given this user & his sock puppets' 169.244.143.115 & 216.220.231.226s previous behaviour & modus operandi I don't trust anything they post AllanHainey 12:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Reagan on Cyprus

Only a portion of a message to U.S.A. congress. By 216.220.231.226. AllanHainey 12:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Odelu: an open source RPG gaming world

This seems like it is a manual for an online RPG. Probably copyright, as well, but definitely not a source text.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 22:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Whitesnake

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 22:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Matt Gallagher

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 22:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Its bearing on natural selection

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 21:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Author:Moh. Sanoesi

Has no meaningful content. --Droll 03:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Surviving whirlpools

Not a source text.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 21:00, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Springtime and Harvest

Blank page, never any meaningful text.--Politicaljunkie 21:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Law of attraction

Nice but no attribution and I can't find it on the web. It seems to me that contributions with no attribution or copyright information are not a positive addition to the site. Debates about deleting this sort of thing just use up the time of other users and admin. It just is not worth it. Especially when it comes from users who are not logged on. (Rant over now) --Inge 04:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Category:Stub

I don't really see how we can have stubs on Wikisource, as the text is already written. It's typically a matter of adding the text, then wikifying it. There's no expanding in the process. The category is apparently filled with nearly blank pages with descriptions of the nonexistant text. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 00:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Nix the category, and get rid of {{stub}}, too. Any page with {{stub}} should instead be using {{expand}}.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Rosalind Franklin Obituary: The Times, London (England)

This claims to be a [London] Times obituary. In fact that obituary was written by J. D. Bernal. Who Aaron Klug was I do not know. Stylistically this reads like an Oxford Dictionary of National Biography piece, so would be a copyvio Apwoolrich 20:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Aaron Klug is genuine and a very distinguised scientist who worked with Franklin. This reinforces my view its been lifted from the ODNB. Done anyone have on-line access to it and can check, please Apwoolrich 20:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted the text as a likely copyright violation. The contributor stated that "For copyright purposes I am assuming fair use for the obituary." As previously decided by the community (see Scriptorium, "Fair use & Speeches"), fair use is not applicable to Wikisource. As the text was apparently published in 1958, the text is probably copyrighted. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 20:26, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

No sky and no earth

As above, by 130.111.98.244. Can't find the name of the author on google & dont trust the poster. AllanHainey 12:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Transwiki:Federal recognition

Just an excerpt from a much larger work.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The Natural Taoist

This text is open source, released in 2006 under a non-commercial Creative Commons license by author Michael J. Trout[2]. Note that noncommercial texts are prohibited by the proposed new copyright policy. The text doesn't seem to be previously published, and returns only 8 websites on Google. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 19:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[Against Deletion] Hmm interesting name...Cicero fan or fundamentalist?

Regarding your vote for deletion… I beg to differ, I am the author, and I am publishing it here. Noncommercial text are "proposed" for deletion… Does that mean that the Bible, The Prince, Koran, The Republic… etc... all go? That's a shame. I think that it would be a loss for Wiki if you decide to delete my work. I have always thought of published books as skeletons void of flesh and life, lifeless tombs trapped in time. I choose Wikisource because of the unique linking functionality that allow the enquiring mind to explore knowledge and avenues as they read. It’s not like I expect any exposure here, but I like that others, that care to, can edit the work and to improve it. It sucks being dyslexic. Writing is the hardest thing I do and the time it takes me to write just a paragraph is staggering, believe me. Now if your "real" concern is the copyright I am willing to change it to commercial... But I am guessing it is that latter point you pointed to: your opinion that books need to come in their “skeleton version” before being recognized as a “real” book…I am sorry I didn’t see that written anywhere? If so then that’s a shame because I would think you would see the opportunity to give all authors the opportunity to share their work. Here’s why: How many great books don’t make it into hardbound “skeletons” because a) bias discriminating editor who doesn’t like the content or writing style, b) publishing barriers and challenging that keep capable writers from releasing their work c) a lack of desire on the part of the author who just wants to write and isn’t interested in money or notoriety? Wikisource offers writers like myself the opportunity to freely share their work with others and allows them to actively develop them in real time—so that they can read is constantly evolving and breathing over time. The Natural Taoist for me is an life’s work, that I will write and evolve until the day I die and then it will, I hope, it will be picked up by others to continue and evolve. Books of faith, myth, and truth must have the ability to be change as humanity does. I don’t want to make money off my writing. Not that I would make any… I am in no way a great writer, but I personally think those that do sell books on my subject matter are loathsome lecherous individuals profiting of people who are desperately seeking meaning in an ever growing meaningless society. Those writers are sophists of the worst kind. Truth should not be peddled, it should be freely offered like water, food, and education. I often wonder if Confusions, Socrates, Mohammed, Buddha or Jesus would have written if Wiki were around. I think so. What do you think? But It’s a shame they didn’t. And even worse it a huge loss to humanity they didn’t. If you close the door on me, that’s fine… personally, I don’t care. But, how many great writers could you be shutting the door on? Is it worth the risk over some definition of publishing or copyright rule? But worse, it would be an even greater loss to humanity. Sincerely, Author, Michael J. Trout. H0riz0n 15:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

If this hasn't been previously published then delete, wikisource isn't a repository for vanity publishing books & works which haven't been previously published in another format, however worthy they may be of being read. See Wikisource:What is Wikisource?#What do we include and exclude at Wikisource?. AllanHainey 15:33, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Can you clarify what you mean by published? I have published it electronically as an open source, released in 2006 under a non-commercial Creative Commons license. H0riz0n
Wikisource rests on the fact that there is some kind of hard copy (i.e., non-electronic version) of the works we publish here. Whether it be a speech someone gave at a university or a press conference, or an actual article/book/essay someone wrote and got published elsewhere, there must be a way for us to check what we have with what was actually published. Purely electronic publications is almost (if not always) a quick road to deletion, because we have no way of doing any kind of checking and verification of what we have.
  • Thank you for the clarification. And have changed my position and have deleted the work. Is there a more appropriate wiki site to list eletronic versions of work and plays. If not maybe setting one up myself could be the next best thing. So folks like myself who are not interested in prehistoric publishing methods can post their new, and or developing work. wikipub.com or something like it. Is there a place where folks discuss wiki ideas? H0riz0n 23:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Also, insisting on a pre-existing published hard copy greatly helps to ensure that editors are not using Wikisource as a means of publishing their own material for the first time. Please see our inclusion policy concerning this matter.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Also, evolving works do not fit either; WS takes static copies and publishes them--not works that are expected to be constantly changed by contributors.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 16:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your clarification of Wikisourse
Can you please point to where WS says an author cant modify a work after it has been written? There are countless books that have been reworked and published. However these authors ddint have the ability to keep their books updated. So what version of the book can you publish? The first edition.. second? None because the author has release additional additions. can you please clarify --thanks. H0riz0n
Our inclusion guidelines state that a work must be previously published; if it is changed on Wikisource, it is no longer previously published. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 01:47, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Consolidação Normativa Judicial - art. 248

Not in English.--Politicaljunkie 21:31, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Sablon:abc4

Not sure exactly what it is.--Politicaljunkie 21:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Interview with Brian Baker

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 21:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

GPS Waypoints: United Arab Emirates

This is just an 'add your own' list of gps latitude & longitude co-ordinates. Original poster says "Please share locations of likely interest to others users such as hotels, restaurants, transportatin, sight-seeing points and similar." I don't think this is suitable for wikisource as it isn't a source document & relies upon people adding to it. Delete. AllanHainey 13:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

PART I

The title is so generic that no one will know what this page would even redirect to. Keeping it is of no help to the project.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 17:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, unneeded redirect from a move. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:19, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

PART I CRIMES

Again, the title is too generic.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 17:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted, unneeded redirect from a move. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Il Manifesto del futurismo

Not in English.--Politicaljunkie 23:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy deleted; the text is non-English, incomplete, and it already exists at . // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:30, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Art

Nothing on the page.--Politicaljunkie 23:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Skills to pay the bills

Non-meaningful content.--Politicaljunkie 23:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Le Chant des Wallons

Now that there's no article page, there's no need for a talk page.--Politicaljunkie 23:39, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikisource:Writers of Plays and Musicals

Blank page, never anything useful.--Politicaljunkie 23:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

A mass of Speedy Delete pages

I have marked a mass of pages for speedy delete. They have been carfully checked for links for other pages. Duplicate pages exist for all these pages with more standard names. Sorry to create the extra work. --Droll 18:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

The star I see

Google returns nothing about this work (I tried numerous string searches). It reads like contemporary fiction, anyway, so odds are it's under copyright anyway.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 20:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Kept

This header exists to simplify archival. Please list entries that were kept below.

Himno Nacional Mexicano

This page was tagged for deletion on the 17th of January 2006 by LadyInGrey with the edit summary "incomplete text and exists on es.wikisource", but apparently never listed on this page. // Pathoschild (editor / talk) 06:02, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Claude Gueux by Victor Hugo

The bulk of this is in French, with the opening passages badly translated into English - probably by machine. Apwoolrich 09:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

A Google search came up with this: THE LAST DAY OF A CONDEMNED MAN by VICTOR HUGO Translated by Eugenia De B. Victor Hugo Novels. Phildelphia: The Rittenhouse Press, 1894, pages 5-186. (Bound with Bug Jargal and Claude Gueux; translated from the 4th French edition of 1832.) Its clear there was an English translation extant in 1894, and so clear for us to have if we can find it. I will contact the Gavroche guy to see if we can use it. Apwoolrich 21:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

The earliest collection I own with the translation is dated 1907. I have no idea who the translator is or how old it really is, but 1907 should put it in the public domain. Since I am familiar enough with the wiki concept, I dropped the text into the page, and included the copyright info. -- gavroche.org

Talk:Tell all the Truth but tell it slant --

IMO this article meets the criteria for speedy deletion because the content is Non-notable --Droll 07:04, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

At Verona

As above, by 130.111.98.244. AllanHainey 12:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader (Ælfric's Homily on the Assumption of St. John the Apostle)

This is a stub with no English content whatsoever. Although works with some of the text might arguably be kept for later continuation, this isn't even a start at adding the text. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 20:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Technically, it is English. It's Old English (Old English and Anglo-Saxon are oftentimes used interchangibly). A while ago I brought this up, and it was decided to keep all Old, Middle, and Modern English works. This is similar to the inclusion of works in Ancient Greek by Aristotle and Plato (which is not generally readable by modern-day Greeks) on the Greek Wikisource sub-domain. If someone who knows the language could translate it, that'd be great. But on the merits of it being an early form of what we speak today, this should be included in this sub-domain.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 21:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Apwoolrich. 80.47.214.33 18:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy kept as nominator. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader (Ælfric's Preface to Genesis)

Same reason as above: This is a stub with no English content whatsoever. Although works with some of the text might arguably be kept for later continuation, this isn't even a start at adding the text. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 20:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep for the same reason as above: Technically, it is English. It's Old English (Old English and Anglo-Saxon are oftentimes used interchangibly). A while ago I brought this up, and it was decided to keep all Old, Middle, and Modern English works. This is similar to the inclusion of works in Ancient Greek by Aristotle and Plato (which is not generally readable by modern-day Greeks) on the Greek Wikisource sub-domain. If someone who knows the language could translate it, that'd be great. But on the merits of it being an early form of what we speak today, this should be included in this sub-domain.—Zhaladshar (Talk) 21:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Apwoolrich, 80.47.214.33 18:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy kept as nominator. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 08:07, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

No consensus

This header exists to simplify archival. Please list entries that were kept as lacking sufficient consensus to delete below.

Sequence:Fibonacci numbers

For the same reason why Pi to the x-places should be deleted.--Politicaljunkie 18:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Proposed_deletions/Archives/2006-03&oldid=1171542"