Wikisource:Proposed deletions

Archives

This page collects requests for deleting specific articles from Wikisource. If you want a page deleted for copyright reasons please list it at Wikisource:Possible copyright violations. If you think a page should be deleted for any other reason, please list it here so it can be discussed. Articles remaining on this page should be deleted if there is no significant opposition. Use {{delete}}.

See also Category:Deletion requests

October 2006

Please note that Category:Edmeston, New York Images have lots of images never moved to en. 555 16:31, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

it is difficult to do something, as there are mostly no sources and licences giver; probably it can be PD, but commons would not keep them I am afraid. -jkb- 08:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I will try to have a look when I get the time. Mainwhile if somebody else want to do it, go! ;o) Yann 00:19, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete all that have no source and no license, especially if they're also unused. —Angr 11:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I have deleted them. It seems that the images has been moved to commons (from en.source) in 2007 or later, see e.g. the notices in en:File:Edmeston NY Otsego School.jpg and commons:File:Edmeston NY Otsego School.jpg. -jkb- 18:29, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

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)

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)

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

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

• 9 broken redirects.-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC) - - - done -jkb- 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
• Author:Virginia Woolf belongs to en:Author:Virginia Woolf.-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Ben Roggen and Talk:Ben_Roggen. Translate it from dutch with http://translate.google.com to see it is not for Wikisource. - - - done -jkb- 06:58, 1 August 2009 (UTC)-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• Dagome Iudex (latina) belongs to la:Dagome Iudex.-Aleator (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• The Canon of Yâo belongs to en:Classic of History/The Canon of Yâo. -Aleator (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
• 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)

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

• 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)
• 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)

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)

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

Galaktion Tabidze

I am afraid that all texts from this author here - see Galaktion Tabidze - are copyvios as the author died 1959 (see e.g. w:en:Galaktion Tabidze). I contacted the users User talk:Antonio and User talk:Tokoko. If there will be no answer we have to delete them all (but possibly in some 3 weeks they could be published on Wikilivres anyway). -jkb- 14:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

You're right, but I as a citizen of Georgia can confirm that the Government, the Council of writers and poets, the Patriarchate, and many other institutions have opened creativity Tabidze in the public domain, because Taidze very famous and beloved poet of all Georgians.--თეკა 14:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Difficult to understand what you mean. What some councils, Patriarchate or some institutions do is one point. The other one is the fact that (as far as I know) the Georgian copyright law protect work 70 years after the death of the author. Some institution, a Patriarch, council or even the government cannot open a protected work into the public domain (the legislative can do it). The holder of the copyright title can do it, and this is the author itself or the testamentary heir. If you have some links that provide the text PD so please let us know. Regards, -jkb- 17:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I won't be saying that the tests are in PD. Unfortunately, I have to agree that 70 years haven't paseed. But this human is a classic of Georgian literature, who had greatly influenced Georgian Culture , and who is considered to be the King of Georgian Poets. Also, I can assure you that there won't be problems with relatives of Galaktion. Please remember, that the main purpose of policies of Wikimedia Foundation is protecting it's projects. In this case bureaucracy is not clever, as we will lose a lot, and won't get anything back. --Gaeser 18:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Well. The point is not that the author is considered to be a very important poet, and not that probably nobody would make troubles here. The point is (and it is not bureaucracy but the very copyright policy of the WM Foundation) that the texts are not legally PD but protected and copyrighted. They will be deleted on this domain. As I mentioned above, the texts could be presented after January 1st 2010 on the project Wikilivres as we have the protection of 50 years after the death there. You should let me know. Regards, -jkb- 18:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

• This case is not as easy as it would first seem. Some of the poems were first published before 1923, and to that extent there should be no problem with these under US law. These should be identified. Beyond that it would certainly be the easiest course to transfer the rest to Wikilivres at the end of the month when these works become PD in Canada. That Tabidze's poems would be a welcome cultural addition to Wikisource is not to be doubted; unfortunately, that is not a point that has much weight in copyright discussions. In Soviet times many of these works might not have retained their copyright protection, and this has been a source of much debate with regard to works of Russian authors. These would have received the most attention because Russia was clearly the most populous of the Soviet republics. The question here becomes whether post-Soviet Georgian law would have restored copyrights to authors whose works had gone into the public domain during Soviet times. Who were Tabidze's heirs? If there are none in accordance with Georgian inheritance law, does the copyright default to the state? If that is the case the Georgian government, and others noted above, may very well have the right to put the material in the public domain or provide some other kind of licensing. Eclecticology 19:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I tried to investigate a bit and then I asked on Commons on Commons:Commons talk:Licensing#Georgian copyright law, the answer came from Lupo here. The Georgian Copyright law 1999 says 70 years post mortem, and short terms copyright of the SU has been restored to 70 years as well, i.e. generally 70 years p.m. That means: all texts shall be moved to WL and deleted here after January 1st (I will do it). If there are some texts published prior to 1923 so somebody who knows the language and the sources (that should be given) can let me know and such texts will stay here, naturally. For details see article 67(2, 3, 4, 5) of the Georgian Copyright Law 1999. -jkb- 18:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

All right - let it be so, but I hope that they'll be moved to WL.--Gaeser 19:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, really sorry, but the most texts from him here are copyvios. Anyway: the texts can be imported to Wikilivres and you can link to it from here and from your Wikipedia project as well. I will start to move the texts by import after January 1st 2010. But however, I will need some help. Firstly, the texts that have been published outside the territory of the USA prior to 1923 can stay here, but we need all details about it (year of publishing, place, title of the book). Secondly, the titles of some more texts are with brackets like (): what does it mean? I think I will move them without the bracktes. Thirdly, on Wikilivres we use internationalized templates so that the most of them will have to be changed. For the first, you can have a look at User:-jkb-/Moving Tabidze - make there notice for all works published before 1923, please. Regards and nice post-X-mas days and a happy New Year - wished by -jkb- 17:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Brackets mean that poetry hasn't any title. There is first sentence of poetry in the brackets.--Antonio 10:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see. So the brackets will stay, I guess. Thanks. -jkb- 00:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, Ant wrote all already. Also, jkb, merry Christmas, as Georgians celebrate on the 7-th if January. :)--Gaeser 19:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Well, in this case once more: Merry X-mas in some more days. I am sure I will not forget the date as my wife is born on January 7th :-)... Keep well, -jkb- 00:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

See Template:PD-US-1923-abroad/KA, -jkb- 17:11, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I suppose that the way this is handled is a matter of convention. In some books of poetry first lines are the titles. A generic title like "A Sonnet" is seldom useful, even if provided by the poet himself. The person browsing through a list of poems for something familiar is not likely to know whether these words are first lines or titles. An opening bracket would force sorting these into separate lists. This I would suppress the bracket, but retain the ellipsis at the end of the "title". Eclecticology 19:19, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Brackets or something else - however it should be used the same system here and on Wikilivres. The Georgian editors should decide it. The most important point is the question of the unicode sorting, indeed, especially in a multilanguage domain like here (or Wikilivres). Brackets would be sorted even prior to the Latin characters and even prior to numbers, not together wit the Georgian ones. Are there any special characters in Georgian used in this language only? -jkb- 23:33, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Looking at my Unicode book: Georgian does not appear to have many special punctuation symbols. It has a special paragraph separator symbol, U+10FB, which must be followed by by the U+2029 paragraph separator code. It also borrows its full stop, U+0589, from Armenian. Neither of these situations can be expected to occur at the beginning of a line. I'm assuming that Georgian speakers have figured out what to do with old texts that use the now-obsolete capital letters. Besides this, Georgian borrows ASCII punctuation. It seems to be a well-behaved language. I have consistently believed that the use of punctuation marks in linkable titles should be limited, and even avoided altogether in the opening position. While textual accuracy would appear to demand using brackets, quotation marks and inverted Spanish question marks at the beginning, these can always be restored in the article header without compromising the sorting process. Eclecticology 08:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Well after all the following sollution would seem to me as acceptable: we do not use any brackets or other characters on the beginning (the unicode sorting will be fine), we use only something like bracket ) or better an asterix * on the end and in the note there will be a notice about the lack of title (both templates here and on WL use the parametre notes so that it should be OK). -jkb- 09:16, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I still tend to prefer an ellipsis (...) at the end, as this mark tends to indicate that there is more to follow, but that's not a big deal. Eclecticology 01:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, ellipsis is fine, I start this afternoon. Regards, -jkb- 10:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

I started the imports, a "to do list" etc. see wikilivres:User:-jkb-/Import Tabidze. -jkb- 18:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Georgian Wikisource does not exist yet. Before moving Georgian works to Canadian Wikilivres, please ensure that the works are in the Canadian public domain or with any copyright holders' permission to post. Pre-1923 public domain applies in the USA but not normally in Canada.--Jusjih 01:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

The poet in question died in 1959. His works went into the Canadian public domain while this discussion was happening. Eclecticology 07:43, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. Tabidze's works published prior to 1923 will stay here. The other works are PD Canada since January 1st 2010. -jkb- 15:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

January 2010

Category:Aeres language

And the four pages in the category. There is no such language as "Aeres". —Angr 12:28, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

• This seems to relate to a discussion raised in March 2009 in the archives. What's not clear is whether the discussion then was intended to apply to these pages. Eclecticology 00:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
• meta:Requests for new languages/Wikipedia Aeres is a good read. I dont care about ISO codes; I want page scans. I don't think we should have "Wikisource translations" for a language until at least one original PD work in that language has been identified and attested. Even if it is a church record for the village; we need something, and it needs to be scanned and uploaded. John Vandenberg 01:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
  • btw, google searches for phrases from The Lord's Prayer only show our page. John Vandenberg 01:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
  • This is such a low standard that it should be easy for any serious person to provide proof that something has been published in the language. ISO codes aren't important for this multilingual project which, among other things, serves as a Wikisource incubator. The ISO code may be important for a separate project in a language, but the language hasn't gone that far yet. Eclecticology 18:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
• There have been two discussions on Aeres in the past (unfortunatelly moved to archives although not closed). In both cases Ooswesthoesbes opposed the deletion. -jkb- 11:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Why discuss this again and again? We just need an admin who deletes this stuff. It's a fact that this "language" is a fake. We are speaking about a language allegedly spoken in the centre of Europe. If that was true there would be hundreds of books discussing the language. But the supporters of "Aeres" have consistently failed to produce any evidence of the language's existence since three years. Even if we consider it a constructed language there still is no evidence that this language is more than a made-up role-playing fun thing pushed to the real world by a handful guys. Give me three days time and I'll construct you Beres, Ceres and Deres languages.

Just delete it. --::Slomox:: >< 12:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

• Please curb your impatience. The discussion has only been active for one week. If previous discussions were archived without action that suggests that those discussions were inconclusive. A published sources criterion has already been raised, and I find that more influential and objective than your allegations. Eclecticology 18:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

If it is impatient to say "just delete it" after this has been around for three years without any evidence for the language's existence and recurrent discussions without result, yes, then I am impatient.

If previous discussions were archived without action that suggests that those discussions were inconclusive. Could you summarize the points raised in the previous discussions that remain inconclusive? Cause to me it seems as if everybody agreed that there are no sources or evidence and opted for "delete" except for Ooswesthoesbes.

2007 Ooswesthoesbes said: Please note we are making a request for an ISO 639 code. According to the ISO 639-3 Change Requests documents no code was ever requested.

Ooswesthoesbes claimed to possess a Aeres dictionary. If that was true it should have been easy for him to provide the title and author of this dictionary to proof that the language exists.

In the 2009 discussion Ooswesthoesbes didn't back up his "Keep" with arguments, but instead he declared that Aeres could be considered Limburgish.

Ooswesthoesbes claims that he has no detail knowledge about the language at all and is just a ideational supporter. Still he is one of the main contributors to the Aeres Wikia.

But the weirdest thing is the language itself. According to the project proposal the language at some point in time became "reclassified as Low Saxon". And "this language is the same as West-Frisian", and "You can compare this language to Limburgish". And it's spoken in both Germany and the Netherlands. If that was true the language should be famous! At least as famous as Sater Frisian. As a native speaker of Low Saxon I can assure you that no linguist with a sane mind would jump to the conclusion that the language of our "Aeres" pages can be "classified as Low Saxon". That's absurd by any linguistic measure. The connection to Limburgish is more plausible judging from Ooswesthoesbes newest contributions to the Wikia project. But we need to stress the word _newest_ contributions. 2009 Aeres is quite different from 2007 Aeres. While 2007 Aeres was a rough language with more Frisian character and many implausible English loans, 2009 Aeres is much more smooth, without many obvious loans and more Limburgish in character.

The article Aast-Ærisk even allows localizing the language: According to that article it is spoken in Groningen, Drenthe and Eastern Frisia. Every linguist with knowledge about the Germanic languages can assure you that the only languages spoken in this area are Low Saxon and the respective official state languages Dutch and German. From that article you could conclude that Aeres is some kind of mindgame "what would the people in that area speak like, if Frisian wouldn't have been replaced by Low Saxon several centuries ago?". That would fit the Aast-Ærisk article but would contradict statements made in other articles.

Sorry, if I'm harsh, but Aeres is so obvious fake, that it hurts my rational mind that anybody would even consider this is not fake. --::Slomox:: >< 19:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm with Slomox here. The fact that the previous discussions were archived without being closed doesn't indicate that the discussions were inconclusive, but merely that no one has gotten around to deleting the pages yet. The language is a one-man show; not only does it not have its own ISO code, there's no evidence it's a dialect or variety of another language that does; in fact, there's no evidence the language exists at all outside of Ooswesthoesbes's imagination. —Angr 14:34, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Slomox and Angr: you know both that I delete quite a lot. In this case I did not. You also know that the discussions here take a bit longer time than on - say - English or German Wiki, as the people do not come here that frequently. This discussion was interrupted beeng archived because somebody didn't know this and archived it simply. Therefore, although I probably think the same like you, I decided to wait a bit and to see what other users here say. Let me say: by the end of this week we shall do it. -jkb- 18:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. I did not participate in the previous discussions, so as far as I'm concerned this discussion started Jan. 19. Perhaps someone erred in failing to delete these pages at the earlier time, but so what? That's no big deal. Just because some of us want a discussion to run its full course does not imply support for the Aeres language. There's no reason to have a panic attack when the material isn't deleted quickly enough. No harm is done by waiting. Eclecticology 21:23, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

私たちの父よ

I started this page almost 5 years ago and am the only editor of it. Frankly, I no longer remember where I got the translation from and cannot confirm that it's public domain. (Doubts have been raised to that effect on the talk page.) Meanwhile, Japanese Wikisource has its own page of the Lord's Prayer in Japanese, so this page is superfluous on top of being potentially a copyvio. —Angr 11:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

OK done -jkb- 14:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and the redirect Watashitachi no chichi yo. Thanks! —Angr 19:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)