Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Book:Overview of the Definite and Plausible Constituents of the Universe

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. Salvio Let's talk about it! 09:31, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Book:Overview of the Definite and Plausible Constituents of the Universe


tl;dr version: delete.

Long version: Alright, this book has been around for quite a while now. I never really knew what to do with it because it's just unfixable. I got tired of seeing it today, so I'm proposing that we send it to book hell.

First, there's a ton of cleanup to do. That in itself is not particularly a problem, but then you get cornered by the scope of the book. There's no way you can give a coherent structure to the book, its scope is just way too large. Basically it's a book about "everything".

For the mathematics of particle physics, one would be better served by a book dedicated to them (aka Book:Representation Theory of Lie Groups & Lie Algebras or Book:Quantum Mechanics or similar). The "matter" part of the universe is already covered by Book:Matter, or if one feels like digging deeper Book:Hadronic Matter or Book:Particles of the Standard Model. For the universe in general, we have Book:Universe (it's not a particularly good book at the moment, but WP:SOFIXIT). This book is basically a badly-ordered mashup of all these books. We currently lack books on say Book:General Relativity, or Book:Cosmology but it's just a matter of time before someone creates them.

So since you can't fix this book, let's just be done with it. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - It seems to me like this book has too wide of a scope; having the various smaller ones that are already there, for the most part, seems like a better idea.  Hi 8 7 8   (Come shout at me!) 22:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Trust User:Headbomb's judgment here.  The opinion of the original and main author, User:UniversumExNihilo, would be welcome, but he seems to have left.  Allow User:UniversumExNihilo to have access to the material should he ever ask.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * UniversumExNihilo has access to this. See . Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 15:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.