Jump to content

Wikisource:Proposed deletions/Archive 2012

Add links
From Wikisource

This page collects done requests for deleting specific articles from Wikisource, 2012.

Other archives see here.

January 2012

[edit]

Gothic Bible in Runic Alphabet

[edit]

Inauthentic: the Gothic Bible was never written in the Runic alphabet. It was written in the Gothic alphabet, as here and here, and most commonly read in the Latin alphabet today, as here, but not in runes. —Angr 09:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. Gothic was written using runes before the Wulfila script (see [1]). If this version is deleted, then the Latin script should be deleted as well. --Ooswesthoesbes 11:58, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are a small number of possibly Gothic inscriptions in runes, but the Bible was never written in runes. The Latin alphabet is universally used for Gothic in learner's materials; any Gothic reader will be written in the Latin alphabet. Including the Latin alphabet here is essential if we're going to be of any use to learners, because the Latin alphabet is all that learners are taught. But writing the Bible selections in runes is neither authentic nor useful for learners, it's just a silly affectation. —Angr 19:23, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is “inauthentic” really a reason for deletion ? Translations are “inauthentic” too but there are permitted on several projects : cf. Wikisource:Subdomain coordination.
Plus, Wikisources are not only for the learners.
Cdlt, VIGNERON 10:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gothic doesn't have any native speakers; who else is this for but learners and scholars? Neither learners nor scholars will be interested in what the Gothic Bible would have looked like if it had ever been written in runes. Gothic alphabet, yes; Latin alphabet, yes; but runes are of no benefit to anyone. It's as if I had a page where I wrote out the Gettysburg Address in English using katakana (フォースコーアンドセヴェンユィーアズアゴー…). —Angr 10:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As creator of this article, I thought I'd throw in my two cents to the discussion. I am aware that the Gothic Bible was never written in Runic, only in the Gothic script. In fact, it was for this very reason that I debated whether to create a Runic version at all. I eventually decided to do so for two reasons. One, it was my understanding that the Gothic language was written in Runic, if only in brief inscriptions, before Wulfilas invented his script. This was, in my mind, sufficient justification for including a Runic version. And two, there was already a Latin alphabet version which is useful in learning the Gothic script, at least it was for me. I thought having a Runic version would be useful to those who already had a working knowledge of the Gothic script to learn Runic. Wikilackey 07:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree with Wikilackey. I'd say we keep this. --Ooswesthoesbes 16:15, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to being of absolutely no use to anyone, this transcription into runes is purely speculative. The tiny number of runic inscriptions in Gothic does not actually allow us to deduce how certain Gothic words and sounds would have been written in runes. For example, this text uses ᛩ (not a letter of the Elder Futhark) for 𐌵 (q) and ᛇ (attested only as a vowel in North and West Germanic runic writing!) for 𐍈 (ƕ); in fact, we have no way of knowing what runes Goths would actually have used for these sounds. In other places, it contradicts the evidence provided by the few inscription we have. For example, w:Gothic runic inscriptions indicates that [ŋɡ] was spelled ᚾᚷ (i.e. ng) in runes, but in the Gothic alphabet it was spelled 𐌲𐌲 (i.e. gg). This page spells it ᚷᚷ (i.e. gg), following the Gothic-alphabet practice rather than the attested runic practice. This sort of thing can be fun, and I wouldn't object to moving it to Wikilackey's userspace, but as a source text (which is what Wikisource is supposed to be about) it's unusable. —Angr 16:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's more convincing. I wouldn't like to see this disappear though, so I'd say we move it to Wikilackey's user space. --Ooswesthoesbes 17:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done This may turn into a fun little side project. On a related note, is there a comprehensive list of Gothic Rune inscriptions anywhere? I can't seem to find one. Nevermind, didn't notice the link. Wikilackey 21:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the redirect. Redirecting from the mainspace to userspace has several negative effects, greatest being that most users won't notice that they aren't on a real mainspace text.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 06:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

श्रीविष्णुसहस्रनामस्तोत्रम्‌

[edit]

Speedy delete requested of a previously deleted page. This is now at Sanskrit Wikisource (sa:श्रीविष्णुसहस्रनामस्तोत्रम्‌), so it doesn't belong here .—Angr 16:32, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

બાજકોટ

[edit]

This article is not for wikisource. It`s for wikipedia (gu)

Deleted on 15 January 2012 by Ooswesthoesbes.--Jusjih (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Polski

[edit]

Shouldn't this be at pl:? --Ooswesthoesbes 12:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, because some authors of the works first published before 1923 put there are still copyrigted in Poland, but not copyrighted in US. Electron  <Talk?> 20:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But aren't the servers of pl.ws in the US as well? --Ooswesthoesbes 17:08, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it may be the local policy of pl-ws not to host works that are not public domain in Poland. It's certainly the policy of de-ws not to host works that are not public domain in Germany, even though the servers of de-ws are in the U.S. —Angr 20:31, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, then they should saty I guess :) --Ooswesthoesbes 10:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kept and closed. See also Wikisource:Subdomain coordination.--Jusjih (talk) 09:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012

[edit]

All templates by Atakan

[edit]

Between December 2008 and March 2009, a user named Atakan created several templates which he put onto the Main Page for Krymchak (an endangered Jewish language related to Crimean Tatar). For some reason, he gave all of these templates Irish names:

However, all of these templates are appropriate only for a Wikipedia Main Page, not a Wikisource Main Page. I've removed them all from the Krymchak Main Page now and am proposing them for deletion. —Angr 22:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done (with help from LadyInGrey (talk • contribs • global contribs)). I’ve delete Template:Comhthionscadail too. VIGNERON (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some categories

[edit]

Please speedy delete the following language categories, as they've been moved to native names:

Thanks! —Angr 21:41, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion to make way for a move

[edit]

Could an admin please move Pater hēmōn to Πάτερ ἡμῶν? Doing so requires deleting the latter link (currently a redirect), so I can't do it myself. Thanks! —Angr 23:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

“A Celebration of Grandfathers”

[edit]

No indication what this is or where it comes from, but even if it is freely licensed, it belongs at en-ws, not here. —Angr 00:15, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should be deleted in my opinion. --Ooswesthoesbes (talk) 09:07, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done, --LadyInGrey (talk) 01:11, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Garagedoo2

[edit]

Blatant advertising. —Angr 00:15, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

રચનાત્મક કાર્યક્ર્મ and all subpages

[edit]

Incorrect spelling, this and all subpages are redirected to correct spelled page names.--Dsvyas (talk) 20:11, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

done, and please, check "what links here:" [2] Thanks! --LadyInGrey (talk) 01:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some more speedies

[edit]

Similar to the categories just above, please speedy delete the following:

Thanks! —Angr 19:51, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Just one more:

—Angr 22:05, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete

[edit]

The following page has been transferred to the en: domain name.

Thanks! - Cultures4 (talk) 21:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Deletion requests/Unpublished and Template:No publishing info

[edit]

Personally, I think this cat has been empty for a few years now. Template:No publishing info seems to put the pages in that cat, but for a wiki as small as ours I don't think there is any plus effect. As you can see above (on this page), Template:No publishing info is hardly used, people just add a page without publishing info to Wikisource:Proposed deletions (which seems fair to me). --Ooswesthoesbes (talk) 09:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done Also Template:Published?.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 07:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another renamed category

[edit]

Please delete Category:廣東話, as it has been renamed Category:粵語. Thanks! —Angr 22:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done, --LadyInGrey (talk) 01:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two user pages of nonexistent users

[edit]

User:Tmasdp and User:Wrkeeqqdap were created by anons; there are no such users. —Angr 09:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

[edit]

દેખંદા કોઇ આ દલમાંય (ઝાલરી)

[edit]

Gujarati now has its own subdomain, so no new pages should be created here. Also, I'm doubtful this is really a useful source text anyway. —Angr 18:18, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. –BruTe 10:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Battle of Jutland

[edit]

There's a properly proofreadable version of this text on the English subdomain (en:The Battle of Jutland). Jafeluv (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done--Doug.(talk • contribs) 07:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012

[edit]

North Frisian Wikisource moved

[edit]

Please delete User_talk:Marschmensch (... and maybe a few other talk pages) after moving the whole North Frisian wikisource project from Main_Page/Nordfriisk to a new namespace "text" within frrwiki w:frr:Text:Hoodsid.
Thank you!--Murma174 (talk) 09:48, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted your talk page. Could you please provide us with a list of pages to be deleted? Or please mark all those pages. --Ooswesthoesbes (talk) 11:17, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just checked the deletion log of July,10 again. Obviously there are no discussion/talk pages left. Thank you! --Murma174 (talk) 21:14, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

[edit]

Üüs Söl’ring Lön’

[edit]

Please delete Üüs Söl’ring Lön’ - dead redirect. Thank you --Murma174 (talk) 11:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, jkb! --Murma174 (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

[edit]

Deletion of Template:User xx (language)

[edit]

I have just noticed that Wikisource still has the old language user templates Special:PrefixIndex/Template:User which have all been replaced by the global rollout of mw:Extension:Babel {{#babel:...}}. Can I suggest that we look to run a bot through, convert users to the new format, and then delete, otherwise deprecate, the templates. billinghurst sDrewth 11:43, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+1, sure, support, -jkb- (talk) 12:00, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
+1 too, VIGNERON (talk) 06:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. –BruTe 09:58, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Von dem Fischer un syner Fru

[edit]

de:Von dem Fischer un syner Fru (1857) is the same text, checked and documented. --Ikar.us (talk) 13:17, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

thx, done -jkb- (talk) 14:06, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
not sure what you did -jkb-. I'm deleting as the text exists on de.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw the discussion at [[3]], checking with de.wikisource.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done (again) This exists in identical form on de.wikisource. The fact that the editor doesn't think Plattdeutsch belongs on de.wikisource is irrelevant. de.wikisource is for all German works that are able to be hosted there until and unless a special subdomain is created (see m:Requests_for_new_languages/Wikisource_Low_Saxon). If a new subdomain is created then the work can be easily taken from de.wikisource.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:54, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If de.ws thinks, that they need to host the text, because it is part of a larger collection that is written in German in most parts, then I have no strong feelings against it. But that doesn't change the fact, that the text is Low Saxon and is therefore part of nds.ws.
There is no logical reason to delete it from the nds.ws project at all. Therefore I request the immediate reversal of the deletion. --::Slomox:: >< 14:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is very logical, Low German is German, it is accepted at de.ws and exists there. This project has a policy against allowing works that can be placed at a language subdomain. The distinction between dialects and minority languages is not a clear cut one but there is no reason for us to make an exception to the rule for a Low German when de.ws is willing to host it. If you eventually get your subdomain approved at meta you can copy all the relevant material from de.ws freely and fight with them over whether their rules require it to be deleted. In the meantime, it does not belong here.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 18:48, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This project has a policy against allowing works that can be placed at a language subdomain. If that was a valid argument it would mean that all content in Category:nds should be moved to de.ws, not just one single page.
'nds' is accepted as a language in its own right by the ISO 639 as well as the Wikimedia Foundation. There's a Wikipedia and a Wiktionary, and the Wikisource is considered eligible by the Wikimedia language committee. So it is already agreed upon that nds.ws will be created, just the time is not yet fixed.
The nds.ws test project is hosted here on oldwikisource and has collected more than 1000 pages of Low Saxon content. It's just ridiculous to delete a single page from this collection. --::Slomox:: >< 20:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Having an ISO code does not a language make; lots of dialects, regional languages, etc. have ISO codes. Consider the information at wikipedia:Low_German#Legal_status. Additionally, the language is ineligible as a wikisource project. The project is required to remain continuously eligible, which among other things requires several active editors over several months. You have had only one active editor since 2009, you, and your last mainspace contribution was over a year ago. All your draft project has are bare texts without any scans. Scans are available, in fact the work we deleted had scans on de.ws. All you are doing is creating another ang.ws. Having a wikipedia and, even more so, a wiktionary, in this language/dialect, is very important. Having a separate wikisource is not. There's a strong argument for no subdomains at all for wikisources but to treat the languages like different wikiprojects or maybe namespaces within a single domain. We don't have these rules to deny subdomains to minority languages. They are to ensure that wikisources are viable and work isn't duplicated, etc. We can't have a bunch of works here that can also be at de.ws, we just don't allow it.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 01:26, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are not argueing ad articulum but ad proiectum or ad linguam. Create a deletion request for the project if that is your argument. These are not arguments against this particular page. --::Slomox:: >< 13:09, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A similar case: There are examples of texts in languages spoken in Italia different from Italian: they are hosted here and transcluded there (it could be in the opposite direction, or we could delete them here, or delete them there, I don't mind but mantain transclusion system for a once-proofreading is best); e.g. La profezia di Giona volgarizzata in dialetto sardo Logudorese is Sardinian and it's wrapped also at it:La profezia di Giona volgarizzata in dialetto sardo logudorese: they are identical texts. -Aleator 19:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's certainly a possibility that can be discussed, if the conditions are right. But here is not the place to discuss it. This is a deletion request and it's invalid because oldwikisource hosts a nds.ws test project and "Von dem Fischer un syner Fru" is a public domain text in Low Saxon and therefore is rightfully placed in the nds.ws test project. If Doug questions the validity of the nds.ws test project he should file a deletion request for the whole project and not for a single page (but I wouldn't advise him to try, because he is wrong. The project proposal is deemed "eligible" by the language committee on Meta and "remaining active" is not a requisite for eligibility, it's just a requisite for the step from "eligible" to "finally approved", see meta:Language proposal policy).
Short recap: This is a deletion request and it's invalid. So please undelete the page. --::Slomox:: >< 12:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of ਮਰਨ ਤੌ ਪਿਛੌਂ ਯਾਦ ਕਰੋਗੇ ਮੈਨੂੰ ਕੀ?

[edit]

I have doubts of this being in public domain.--Guglani (talk) 17:02, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're the only editor of the page, I speedy-deleted it as "author request". —Angr 21:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian indices

[edit]

Are these indices : Index:27884 sq.pdf and Index:OSCE KODI ETIK I MEDIAS SHQIPTARE 21139 sq.pdf really free ?

They come from the OSCE website wich state « The content of the Website … is owned or licensed by the OSCE, subject to copyright and other intellectual property rights under the law. Content may not be reproduced, copied, distributed, transmitted, broadcast, sold, licensed, or exploited in any way without the express prior written permission of the OSCE. » So the licence PD-UN on the files seems to be wrong.

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 07:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done These are obvious copyright violations. The user appears to think they have permission, I've deleted the indices and tagged the files at commons but given the user the OTRS instructions for permissions and will undelete when they get that.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 03:48, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012

[edit]

Pages created by User:Гүзәл Ситдиҡова

[edit]

This user posts own poems at Wikisource (see [4], [5]). According to our rule we have to exclude original writings by a contributor to the project and, thus, delete her pages. –BruTe 11:02, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Guzal Sitdykova is a well-known Bashkir poetess, there are articles about her on several Wikis. Some of these pages contain the poems that have never been published before, but some of these poems have already been published. --Comp1089 (talk) 12:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Generally it has been the peer review process that has been the decider, and if it is published that has been the qualifier. What you do when a published writer chooses you to have their other works is a little trickier. If you think that they are worthy of keeping, you would want to confirm that the person is who they say they are, and the OTRS process for hosting the works would be necessary. If the poet is published, then I would look to have the community agree to host the works, no precedence set from the action. billinghurst sDrewth 13:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Poetry is a hard case unless it's a very well known author. I mean, I've published a poem before, but my work isn't exactly worthy of wikisource. I think we have a sort of unwritten quasi-notability-of-work-or-author rule; which is very hard to apply with regard to minority languages, I suspect most of us wouldn't recognize the name of the current poet laureate of our own country, let alone any other current poet from some other country. On the other hand, this page Wikisource:What_Wikisource_includes authorizes moving the work to user space. Provided, as was mentioned on IRC, the works are actually owned by the author. Publication could have involved transfer of rights, in which case the author may not be in a position to grant CC-BY-SA or better rights.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 23:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As there is a new poem Һине уйлап... Гүзәл Ситдиҡова by the author today and as I didn't find any notice on publshing before and a licence, I propose ether to delete these poems or to move them to the user space. -jkb- (talk) 07:20, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This user continues adding new pages: Тән һәм йән. Гүзәл Ситдиҡова and Шиғыр түгел шиғыр. Гүзәл Ситдиҡова added today.
But regardless this poetry conforms our rules or not, we may have copyright problem. I see no response to @-jkb- request. Nor any OTRS ticket number provided. Nor any link to a page that confirms license/authorship. It seems to me that we still do not know whether User:Гүзәл Ситдиҡова is really Guzal Sitdykova, the author of this poetry. I suggest move the poetry to userspace (or even delete) until a clear confirmation is received. Ankry (talk) 10:28, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is: if it is a copyvio (and I think it can be definded as a copyvio), so it doesn't matter if it is in the article name space or in user name space or elsewhere. Copyvio stays copyvio everywhere and sould be deleted (when we later get a permission, so it can be restored antime). -jkb- (talk) 16:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@-jkb-: Deletion requires admin rights. But as I can see no admin wanted to take a decision for over 2 years. So I do not believe such a decision to be taken soon. While moving the pages to userspace will probably not be ignored by the uploader and we may expect their action. Of course, if an admin wants to take the decission to delete the files temporarily, I will support this decision. But history of this section shows me that it is unlikely. Ankry (talk) 17:37, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
К сожалению, я поздно увидела эти записи. Не совсем поняла все, поскольку не владею английским. Приношу свои извинения. Размещенные мной стихи опубликованы в разные годы в разных изданиях. Новые стихи уже включены в сборник стихов, который ждет очереди в государственном книжном издательстве "Китап" (г.Уфа). К сожалению, мы вынуждены ждать несколько лет, когда подойдет очередь( мне обещали, что издадут в будущем году). Очень ограничена возможность публиковаться в журналах, поскольку на башкирском языке их мало, и также приходится ждать очередь для публикации. Эта беда тех, кто пишет на языках меньшинств.

Поскольку я являюсь волонтером Башкирской Википедии, разместившая или отредактировавшая сотни статей на башкирском, прошу проявить снисхождение, разрешить размещать стихи еще до публикации. Мои произведения пользуются спросом у читателей, они постоянно обращаются предоставить свежие произведения. А такая возможность есть только в Викитеке. Обо мне: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B4%D1%8B%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0,_%D0%93%D1%83%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C_%D0%A0%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0 Моя страница участника: https://wikisource.org/wiki/User:%D0%93%D2%AF%D0%B7%D3%99%D0%BB_%D0%A1%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B4%D0%B8%D2%A1%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0 С большим уважением Гузаль СитдыковаГүзәл Ситдиҡова (talk) 11:16, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2012

[edit]

Le secret du papyrus spam --Hsarrazin (talk) 13:35, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Phe 14:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Wikisource:Proposed_deletions/Archive_2012&oldid=1067411"