As you all know, Wikibooks was originally intended for textbooks and other instructional material. But why do many users (meta and wikipedians in particular) think that Wikibooks is a dumping ground for all their book-length stuff even if it is non-instructional in nature (which would be grounds for deletion on [[WB:WIN]])?
It's an interesting discussion on Wikibooks right now about how Wikibookians see ourselves vs how others see Wikibooks, all having started from the controversial deletion of a book, itself forked from Wikipedia over an edit war, which also raised the question on whether Wikibooks should allow limited forms of Wikipedia forking as a book foundation (currently this is not allowed due to [[WB:WIN]] - WB is not an in-depth encyclopedia on any subject).
It also ties in to the question of how effective Wikibooks is in enforcing its policies: WB has about 9000 users (as listed by the special page), but only 25 are admins (and among the 25, 2 are bureaucrats). Even if 1000 users are active on WB (a very conservative estimate), that's still too much for 25 users (assuming they are all active) to handle. Making things noticeably worse is that policies on WB are either unilaterily implemented or are stuck in a limbo since few will make a consensus (there are also many issues on WB that the MediaWiki software cannot address, such as finding the book that a given module is associated with).
Anyways, I want the Wikimedia community at large to comment on how they think of Wikibooks and its purpose, and that's why I've posted a message here.