Quantcast

Wikipedia's deletion of the Foswiki article page

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Wikipedia's deletion of the Foswiki article page

Dan Dascalescu-4
Quick intro:

[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foswiki][The Foswiki Wikipedia page]]
was deleted by Wikipedia editor consensus on 2009-Feb-09. The deletion
discussion can be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Foswiki.
I'm not aware if there has been a discussion of this on the mailing
list (the search in the archives at Sourceforge returned nothing), but
the article deletion page suggests ("canvassing") that there has been
some form of recruitment of support. Anyway, the reason cited for
deletion was lack of notability.

In my opinion, the decision to delete the Foswiki page from Wikipedia
was nothing short of asinine. However, our opinions on Foswiki's
notability would have very little value given Wikipedia's rules for
notability ("subject of multiple, reliable, independent, non-trivial,
published works") - which ironically (or perversely?), the Mediawiki
article doesn't satisfy either.

The problem, therefore, lies within the rules (OK, there's a second
problem of wiki editors who have nothing better to do with their lives
than mark for deletion articles they don't know jack about). Since not
much can be done about said editors, I started a thread on the
Wikien-L mailing list about revisiting the rules for deletion of
software articles:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.english/99200

(subscription info at https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l)

I know that creating the world's best online encyclopedia is not
Foswiki's aim. I also realize that when someone shows for a wiki, they
are quite likely to visit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wiki_software and shy away from
Foswiki because it's a "redlink", or otherwise distrust Foswiki ("if X
is not in Wikipedia, then X doesn't exist"). So if anyone cares about
this move on Wikipedia's part, I'd encourage them to post on the
thread above. Maybe, just maybe, we'll manage to point out that a
piece of software does not need a CNN article or a book to be notable.

Disclaimer: I am not a Foswiki developer or user (I have been using
TWiki at work since 2006). I found out about Wikipedia's deletion of
the Foswiki page after the page of another Perl wiki I work on,
MojoMojo, has been deleted as well.

Best regards,
Dan Dascalescu

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Foswiki-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/foswiki-discuss
Loading...