Wikisource:Proposed deletions/Archive 2009

This page collects done requests for deleting specific articles from Wikisource, 2009.

Other archives see here.

February 2009

Languages for deletion

The following languages have its own subdomain, but there are many pages here still. They should be deleted. See:

Category:Kannada - I have contcted the (probably inactive) bct
Category:Bengali - see also the talk from Oct 2008 above, i asked User Bellayet today once again - can be deleted, see here - - - Bengali done, -jkb- 07:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Limburgish - as discussed several times here [1], [2]...
- Deleted. Eclecticology 19:04, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Русскій языкъ - after some long discussions here the pages has been obviously moved to ru and are tagged with delete

some ones with a very great number of pages, therefore a bot deletion would be the best. -jkb- 11:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Has it still not been deleted? Are there no admins here or is it too much work? --Ooswesthoesbes 14:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are admins. But not only that a long time nothing happened, it is a quite lot of pages and it would be better to use a bot. Let us see. -jkb- 16:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the time we have been waited half of those pages could already have been deleted :) But, you're right that it's a hell to delete that many pages by hand. I once deleted 300 pages on one day, but my hands were knocking from the inside... --Ooswesthoesbes 17:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be done now, -jkb- 16:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hangeul syllables

After I found an old discussion about the page List of Hangeul syllables, see Wikisource:Proposed deletions/Archive 2006#February 2006, I have got a reaction today, which I moved to here from my talk page, -jkb- 18:54, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I agree with the delete, but can you move the page to commons first?

If you can do this, I will change the external link from...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangul

It was the most helpful EL on the wikipedia page and the need is met by Wikipedia:EL, however this page does not belong on wikisource.

Can you move it to commons? The other pages from the past discussion from 2006 (3 years ago) are no longer accurate. The pages have changed.

Those delete arguments are no longer valid because only one of the pages are helpful (although just one is all anyone needs anyway).

So go ahead with the delete, but please move it to commons since I don't know what I'm doing outside of wikipedia. The policies are a tough read, but I have already copy/pasted this list to my email folder, so I'm set and don't need this page anymore either.

I do agree with the joke that this page could put a lot of the pay-sites out of business, however I found this page just 3 days ago, and that's why I noticed so fast--I use this all the time! I love it, I found it just in time. This page is so clear and clean and organized (and the perfect breadth of coverage).

So thanks whatever you decide to do, just back it up on commons and I'll relink from the wikipedia article (which is not helpful at all, to someone interested in learning korean--see WP is not a how-to manual.

Thanks,

your friend in chess

LeeJaedong 17:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LeeJaedong. Thanks for your notice here. But in fact I am not sure if it is a good idea to move the page List of Hangeul syllables to commons (the page has been deleted in the mean time but this is no problem). First, the page does not suit the scope of commons, I think, and secondly, it would be deleted there within some seconds after the upload, I am sure. If you have another idea like to move it to wikibooks etc., so let me/us know, we can renew the page for the import. Cheers, -jkb- 22:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Russian works

Hello, There are a lot of Russian works still here: Category:Русскій языкъ‎, Special:WhatLinksHere/Главная страница: Русскій языкъ, and all subpages, etc.. Were they moved to http://ru.wikisource.org/? Yann 19:52, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well now I really don't know. Yesterday I visited some ten pages in this language and all were tegged by delete/moved to ru. Probably by a chance, anyway I assumed they moved all pages to ru.source as announced in Scriptorium (in September 2008), more over the Main Page Главная страница: Русскій языкъ is tagged by old main pages since december 2008. I will try to aske them once again this week. -jkb- 09:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the pages which were tagged. The remaining are NOT tagged, that's why I ask. Yann 21:33, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sure. I asked just now on the ru.source. Maybe they will answer. -jkb- 21:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is in proces, see User talk:-jkb-#Please do not delete the Russian texts, -jkb- 11:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete

done -jkb- 16:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dmitrismirnov 01:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dmitrismirnov 09:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, --LadyInGrey 02:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Даты and all the content has to be deleted as well!!!
Category:1770
Category:1800
Category:1827
Category:1828
Category:1829
Category:1830
Category:1839
Category:1840
Category:1841
Category:1850
Category:1850-е годы
Category:1875
Category:1894
Category:1900-е годы
Category:1903
Category:1905
Category:1908
Category:1909
Category:1912
Category:1913
Category:1915

Thanks --Dmitrismirnov 13:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks for your help. --LadyInGrey 15:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My user page draft book

Hi, please delete User:Andreas/Kladdebok. It's my draft book on Wikisource, but I'm no longer active and have no use for it. Andreas 16:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

done, -jkb- 16:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

Delete the project Pecheneg

-jkb- suggested to delete the project which is in the Category:Pecheneg - it is something like new Wikipedia domain.

agree, -jkbx- 18:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ThomasV agreed on the Scriptorium page
Delete Yann 18:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. This is all from incubator:Wp/xpc/Main_Page. I have deleted many of the pages and categories, but I have left a few items in Category:Pecheneg as they look like it is Wikisource related. John Vandenberg 02:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the project Aeres

Slomox suggested to delete the project Aeres

agree, -jkbx- 18:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yann 18:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep. If it will be deleted: Limburgish Wikisource might want to have this, but therefore import is needed, and it will take some time before an import request is taken care of. --Ooswesthoesbes 17:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Why would Limburgish Wikisource want this? It isn't Limburgish. The request for an Aeres Wikipedia was rejected by the Language Committe, and I see no reason for it to have a Wikisource page either. —An gr 11:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because Limburgish and Aeres are sort of the same, I recenlty found out. --Ooswesthoesbes 15:13, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The difference being that Limburgish is a real language and "Aeres" isn't. I seriously doubt there are any previously published texts in "Aeres" anyway (i.e. I suspect the few pages in "Aeres" here at Wikisource were originally composed/translated by the uploader). —An gr 18:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And this uploader is known by the name Ooswesthoesbes.

Ooswesthoesbes, do you think, we are fools? Aeres is made up, you know it, we know it. I strongly suspect, that you are the one who made it up. But even if it was somebody else who created Aeres, you tried to push the fake on Wikimedia projects. If you'd tried this show on a wiki in my native language, you'd long been blocked. --::Slomox:: >< 02:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're free to think what you want to think, but I can say you're totally wrong. --Ooswesthoesbes 05:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the project Czornaruski

Slomox suggested to delete the project Czornaruski

agree, -jkbx- 18:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yann 18:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aeres and Middle Dutch were indeed requests, but Czornaruski was a question. I cannot judge Czornaruski, cause I don't know what it's supposed to be. --::Slomox:: >< 19:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, some more Googling revealed, that Czornaruski means "Black Ruthenian". There once was an article en:Black Ruthenian language at the English Wikipedia, but it was deleted. I guess this was from the same user. Both were first created 2005. If somebody here is an admin at en:, he can look up the deleted article, whether it was complete nonsense or not. --::Slomox:: >< 20:05, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Never mind. Indeed, the word Czornaruski could mean something like Black Russian (in fact not Ruthenian, but...). But, it is only one page, and, more over, when somebody creates a language section here so I would expect that he says us what it is (not only "my small brother speaks so funny and I will create for him a wikisource" :-)). More over, it is some three year old. But, I saw that the category and also the page has been edited by User:Niki K who is an admin/bct in the Polish WS. I asked there. -jkb- 21:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that its related to Polish, Ruski means Ruthenian and not Russian. Russian is Rosyjski. --::Slomox:: >< 00:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well however, I hope Niki will answer here soon, them we'll see, good night, -jkb- 00:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Czornaruski is exactly Black Ruthenian - the language is extinct. Niki 12:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When was it spoken? And where was it spoken? By whom? And how does it fit into the family tree of the Slavic languages? --::Slomox:: >< 12:52, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and are there other documents existing in the language? If there are more texts, what is your vision for the language? A own sub-domain, or could it fit into an existing project? And what is the source for the existing text? --::Slomox:: >< 12:55, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ehm, see - I do not think we'll get enough for a subdomain :-), -jkb- 14:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. —An gr 11:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the project Middle Dutch

Slomox suggested to delete the project Middle Dutch

agree, -jkbx- 18:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yann 18:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Neutral --Ooswesthoesbes 12:57, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reason? See the request, -jkb- 05:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The argument for deletion was "completely covered by Dutch wikisource" and that's an invalid argument. --Ooswesthoesbes 14:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What does invalid mean? Is ti not true? Slomox wrote it is covered by Dutch WS and it was a test project. So, did the Dutch WS delete it? -jkb- 14:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is not completely "coverable" (probably incorrect English..) by the Dutch Wikisource. Middle Dutch also still includes other languages like Zeeuws and even some Limburgish. --Ooswesthoesbes 14:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
delete ThomasV 06:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Middle Dutch texts can all go to nl: (just as Middle English texts all go to en:). —An gr 11:10, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that Dutch isn't the only language that originated from Middle Dutch. --Ooswesthoesbes 15:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Still, that's no reason to keep the articles here. Wikisources in general are (or should be) more inclusive about language varieties than Wikipedias are. For example, German dialects like Bavarian, Allemanic, and Ripuarian are accepted at de-ws, although they all have separate Wikipedias from de-wp. Modern Standard German isn't the only language that descended from Middle High German, either, but MHG texts go to de-ws. Since there is no Zeeuws Wikisource, Middle Zeeuws texts can go to nl-ws, especially if Middle Zeeuws is essentially the same as Middle Dutch. Middle Limburgish texts can go to li-ws. —An gr 18:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any languages who actually claim to be a legitimate heir of Middle Dutch (besides Dutch itself)? I'm sure Afrikaans does not claim Middle Dutch texts for their wiki. Limburgish can claim Limburgish texts from the Middle Dutch period, and Zeeuws can claim Zeeuws tesxts from the Middle Dutch period. But none of both can claim the full range of Middle Dutch. No reason at all to create a separate Middle Dutch project. --::Slomox:: >< 02:54, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the project Limburgish

Will it still be deleted or so? I don't like the idea that the Limburgish wiki is on two places at the same time :( And if you're too lazy, I'm willing to delete it myself ;) --Ooswesthoesbes 17:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you also please delete Druhe ihe? It was a little mistake. --Ooswesthoesbes 17:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Limburgish texts belong at li:. —An gr 11:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Innv 04:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anglikan Tradisional

I don't know what language the words "Anglikan Tradisional" are, but the text is in English. Specifically, it's the Nicene Creed from the 1662 Anglican Book of Common Prayer. I've added the text to s:Nicene Creed, so it can be deleted here. —An gr 11:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Seanghaeilge

Please speedy delete this as it has a misspelled title. The correct spelling is Category:Sean-Ghaeilge. —An gr 13:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I think I will make some speedy delete template soon. -jkb- 13:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Until then, please also speedy Category:Lower Sorbian, as I have moved its contents to Category:Dolnoserbšćina. —An gr 13:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made a soft redirect, it hurts nobody :-), -jkb- 15:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Dalton Star

Off topic, no reason for it to be on Wikisource. Should be on Wikipedia if anywhere. J.delanoy 20:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009

Some wrong templates

Please speedy-delete the following pages, which were accidentally created in Template space and have now been moved to mainspace.

Thanks! —An gr 09:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, -jkb- 10:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan talk pages

See: [3] (25 June 2009)

done -jkb- 12:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009

Programa Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan, a party programm of the PKK, from 1995 it is an obvious copyvio, secondly I am not quite sure if it fits all Wikisource conditions, and I suggest to delete it, -jkb- 06:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warned at w:ku:Nîqaş:Programa Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan. It seems as if it was moved from there. -Aleator (talk) 20:24, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, I follow it, -jkb- 06:45, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no answer yet, deleted -jkb- 23:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

9 broken redirects.-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC) - - - done -jkb- 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Author:Virginia Woolf belongs to en:Author:Virginia Woolf.-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ben Roggen and Talk:Ben_Roggen. Translate it from dutch with http://translate.google.com to see it is not for Wikisource. -Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC) - - - done -jkb- 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Zazaki, a main page of w:en:Zazaki language (Turkish) language but with no wikisource-links. Perhaps could be renamed to Main Page:Zazaki in the future.-Aleator (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it is linked from http://diq.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pela_Seri, I will rename it, -jkb- 06:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chunitana, not for Wikisource, deleted twice at w:en:Chunitana.-Aleator (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC) - - - done -jkb- 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dndeswal, test in hindi (translate it from Google to see what it says). -Aleator (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC) - - - done -jkb- 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dagome Iudex (latina) belongs to s:la:Dagome Iudex.-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleted as s:la:Dagome Iudex already received our edit hestory from this domain, so later addition need not be exported.--Jusjih 02:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Canon of Yâo belongs to s:en:Classic of History/The Canon of Yâo. -Aleator (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleted without exporting due to unknown translator's information.--Jusjih 03:46, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Intêrnacyjanal and Category:Czornaruski - non-existent language as far as I can tell. —An gr 19:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See #Delete the project Czornaruski here above (I guess I delete it soon anyway), regards -jkb- 19:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted -jkb- 09:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great; could you also delete Broken/cz:Intêrnacyjanal, which is a redirect to the now deleted page? —An gr 06:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, --LadyInGrey 03:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Ou Apostoliese Kerk

This isn't a text, only a collection of links (both internal and external). Anrie 13:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted. – Innv 09:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ds. Denzel Dick: Wat elkeen van die Ou Apostel-kerk moet wees

Source: [4])

This text is copied from a self-publication. Besides that, the source text makes no claim that it is in the public domain or that it is available under a free license (but even if it was, it would still not qualify for inclusion, since it does not seem to have appeared in a medium that includes peer review or editorial controls and is purely an expression of opinion. Anrie 08:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete, -jkb- 17:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ria De Vos: Die Ou Apostoliese Kerk

Source: [5]

This text is from a forum posting. It has not been published in a medium that includes peer review or editorial controls and is purely an expression of opinion. It also makes no claim that it is available under a free license or has been released into the public domain. I would suggest the information be inserted into a Wikipedia article (the text discusses the Old Apostolic Church), but the source wouldn't even qualify as a reliable one. Anrie 08:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete, -jkb- 17:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009

Nopetro's edits

I gues that the User:Nopetro [edited here on December 1st] without the knowledge which domain he is logged in. I questioned him about the sence of the new pages but there is no answer. I propose the Edits should be deleted. -jkb- 17:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok,

Done: edits in categories are reverted, templates deleted. —Innv {m} 05:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]