Wikibooks:Votes for deletion/Jyotish & How astrology works

Jyotish & How astrology works

These are closed as Delete --Herby talk thyme 11:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I came across these two as they were created while on RC patrol. Neither of them seem to me to be textbooks in their current form by any stretch of the imagination. How astrology works has a copyright symbol on it and my enquiry on the author's talk page (User talk:Rohiniranjan) has gone unanswered. I am content that neither of them are "speedy" ones however as they stand I do not see that as appropriate for Wikibooks --Herby talk thyme Delete both as soapboxing, POV, personal essays, self-promotion, not textbooks, and plain old bad. I think these should be easy speedy deletes based upon content not upon the subject itself. Kellen T 14:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Delete both seem to be original works and are probably speedy delete candidates. Xania talk 15:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Comment. The deletion policy states that we must wait a full week (6 days) between the time a page is created, and when it can be nominated for deletion. That a page isn't perfectly acceptable within the first week of it's existance should not be a surprise, it should not be a cause for alarm, and it should not be a reason to delete the page. A little patience can be a virtue. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Comment I agree - however if you look at the "date" on it it has not just been worked on now, equally there is the copyvio to address --Herby talk thyme 20:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Comment. But I thought that books can be deleted even if new if they are obvious candidates for speedy deletion (i.e. original works). I would suggest that this is an original work and should be speedily deleted. Xania talk 19:35, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Delete - I couldn't have put it any better than Kellen. Webaware 23:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC) Delete - meaningless pseudoscientific junk. PCU123456789 (talk) 19:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC) Delete - without value -Monktalk 07:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC) Delete. All things considered, we should probably delete this one. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 18:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)