Talk:WakkaWiki
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] From VfD
Notability? Mikkalai 01:31, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- weak keep after some expansion. But you must say more than that if you want to keep an article about a discontinued piece of software. Mikkalai 19:13, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
See also:
- Wakkadelete. Ambi 01:33, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Also seems to have a fair number of Google hits. Remove feature list, merge and redirect to Wackowiki. --Korath会話 00:06, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Yep, you got it right. The number is fair indeed: exactly 359 hits (using your link), if you know how to count properly. (Hint: look for page 36 of your google report) Mikkalai 01:15, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- As in the case of the proposed deletion of WikkaWiki, could someone please explain to a wikipedia-newbie the reasons for the deletion of the WakkaWiki entry? I haven't written the present entry (while I've written the first draft of WikkaWiki). I think, though, the (now defunct) WakkaWiki project deserves historical attention as one of the most prominent and popular lightweight wiki engines. Instead of deleting the page (can't understand why) one should try to enrich it. Or am I missing something? -- Dario
- Look at page 16 of your google report, and you'll see 153 hits only. Mikkalai 16:51, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- What you see is 153 hits that Google "thinks" are dissimilar, i.e., after applying a filter, while providing a link to repeat the search without that filter to actually list all hits. And that number is actually significant since it indicates not only the number of installations but also how busilily they are being used (the "number of pages", across all installations that are visible to Google). The total number of pages in Wakka installations is a respectable 117,000; for WackoWiki it's 59,600, and for WikkaWiki it's 29,000 - that tells you something about public usage (but not about usage in intranets!). Now compare that to the number of pages linking to http://wikimediafoundation.org/ (that's all of the pages on Wikipedia), and you get 74,800 hits. Could it be Wakka is more notable then than Wikipedia? I think not. So let's stop squabbling about numbers of hits in Google and how to count them; they are irrelevant. -- JavaWoman
- Can someone explain to me the rationale of deleting Wakka and redirecting it to one of its decendants (Wacko) and not any of the others? All of the Wakka forks have different feature sets leading to people making different choices for a WikiEngine; there is no single descendant of Wakka - for a reason. -- JavaWoman
-
- All these wakkas are secondary copycats, lightweight or hardcore, whatever. All of them together may well fit into a single article. Adding or deleting a couple of features doesn't warrant a separate article. Wiki software article has the whole flock of them, and by the way Kwiki is claimed to be the simplest one, so this claim for notability of wakka is moot. Mikkalai 16:51, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Notable wiki software which although defunct has inspired many forks. Should not be redirected to one of its forks. -- Decumanus 00:07, 2004 Dec 23 (UTC)
- Keep. This is VfD abuse - David Gerard 23:07, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Extreme keep! This is definately notable, and its children are notable in their own right. --L33tminion | (talk) 03:55, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Whether or not the software is being actively worked on, the contents of this article are helpful to a reader looking for an overview of development efforts in the wiki software field. — DV 04:36, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
