Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecce romani

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. —Korath (Talk) 01:35, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Ecce Romani

One of many Latin textbooks about a Roman family. Not notable. Radiant! 15:57, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

Hah! I used these, and so did a friend of mine in a different school system. I remember when we discovered (five or six years later) that we'd used the same book, and started quoting... "Ecce! In pictura est puella. Puella est laeta." Funny how things like this stick in your memory. But I don't really think that makes the books notable. Isomorphic 16:21, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Do we have a policy on textbooks? Certainly a popular one. I had this as well. I can still remember Davus, or, as we called him, Dave the Slave. Meelar (talk) 20:31, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
- Being in an all male school, I was subjected to many utterly predictable jokes about that kid Sextus. Isomorphic 17:05, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep, obviously. Over 9,000 google hits for the series. Kappa 20:59, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Popular textbooks are eminently article-worthy - David Gerard 21:21, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep most books should have articles, and this is even more notable than many. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:35, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Agree with Starblind.--Centauri 10:40, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
For the sake of argument, considering that there are dozens of different Latin textbooks, and all of them cover pretty much the same stuff, it would be nigh impossible to come up with an interesting article for all of them. I learned Latin from 'Liber' and 'Via Nova', and both of them would be described almost exactly as in this article. I believe merging them would be most appropriate, in that case. Radiant! 15:13, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)
- I tend to agree. I could see an article on English language Latin textbooks, or something like that. Isomorphic 17:05, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  - I'm not so sure. I imagine articles could point out differences in the way they approach the language, the order of introduction of various points, etc. I'm not saying it's necessarily true, but I wouldn't want to rule it out without talking with a Latin teacher or someone else who would know the field. Meelar (talk) 17:52, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Not every textbook is noteworthy. If the textbook has some noteworthiness beyond being used in a school somewhere, then we want it. Check out Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ron Larson where it was recently decided that being the author of a textbook is not enough. Lethe | Talk 16:07, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Every textbook is noteworthy. Are we running of hard drive space or something? We need to delete some of these ardent deletionists. Zantastik 23:33, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.