Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/JAMWiki - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

31: 671:
That guideline is there because it makes sense - if articles were kept just because there were other articles that were even more worthy of being deleted, very little would ever get deleted. (Though in this case, I think all the other wiki engines with their own articles on Knowledge (XXG) happen to
388:
Yes, you're definitely free to comment here. The number of usages is ultimately the less important number than the number of notable references, but it's still interesting. Do you have any proof that JAMWiki is in use on thousands of wikis? Obviously, not everyone who downloads some software also
361:
and is used on far more than 30 sites - mostly it is used on non-public facing installations for documentation or development purposes. Obviously it is far less popular than Mediawiki, but suggesting it is only being used in 30 installations is incorrect by multiple orders of magnitude. --
437:) and assuming even a very small fraction of those are actual installs gives an install base of a couple thousand. Additionally, the project has also proven popular with researchers, and I've handled a significant number of help requests from students using it in their projects (examples: 629:. It's true that reliable sources reviews and discussions are lacking, but that is perhaps to be expected for this field. The number of mentions in books and on Scholar convince me that it is at least widely used for academic purposes and per the ieee.org paper that 686:
I admit it might be borderline, but still think that it is sufficiently widely-used to be notable based on (admittedly brief) but numerous references in Books and Scholar and on the activity on its own feedback pages provided by the author above.
85:
and must be discounted. As Whpq says, the inclusion of any topic requires significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Opinions that conflict with the longstanding community consensus about this can't be taken into consideration.
672:
have at least slightly more of a claim to notability than JAMWiki.) c2.com is a wiki (though of course the first :) ). So that seems to just leave a single academic paper, which may or may not say anything substantial about JAMWiki.
611:
might be in depth, but it is behind a paywall. Sadly, many worthy and popular open source projects don't get a lot of coverage in independent reliable sources. JAMWiki might be one of these projects that falls through the cracks.
331:
I can think of at least two other differences: the number of mentions in notable books and press (0, apparently, vs. hundreds), and the number of wikis using the software (around 30, vs. thousands or tens of thousands).
203: 608: 156: 496:
The tool has the base of independent users that are quite frequently mentioning it on the web and is listed in several specialized reviews focusing on Java based Wiki software.
530: 40: 197: 260:
is not. The opinion published by the non affiliated end user is an independent opinion (imagine we would only allow Mac an Linux users to write about Windows!).
584: 234:
There doesn't seem to be any evidence of notability for this wiki software, and according to its article it's only in use on a few dozen websites.
163: 252:. I think it is one of the most popular FOSS Java based Wiki engines, known between users that look for such a solution. WikiMatrix is not 316: 294: 320: 17: 735: 432: 359: 603:
I found a number of mentions of use of the program in scholarly articles, but nothing in depth. There is a mention of it at
642: 576: 717: 69: 46: 646: 218: 129: 124: 510:
That shows that the software exists and is in use. But that is not sufficient to meet the inclusion guidelines. --
185: 133: 419:
I don't track installs so most of the evidence for total installations is speculative, but JAMWiki is included in
478:. I don't see that in any of the sourcing in the article and I can find none when I conduct my own searches. -- 116: 425:, and the vast majority of bug reports and help requests come from non-public-facing wiki installations (see 312: 298: 564: 423: 438: 290: 179: 713: 650: 617: 308: 65: 435: 175: 211: 696: 681: 662: 653:, it would seem very inconsistent to delete the article about this wiki while keeping the others. 621: 591: 553: 542: 519: 505: 487: 452: 398: 371: 341: 302: 269: 243: 120: 98: 677: 501: 394: 337: 265: 239: 225: 538: 58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
712:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
280: 112: 104: 64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
692: 658: 630: 613: 638: 633:
found, considered along with better-known free wiki software. There is some (old) coverage
355: 253: 475: 515: 483: 448: 367: 89: 471: 82: 729: 673: 497: 390: 333: 261: 235: 191: 287:? JAMWiki has the same audience and targets. Only difference it's written in Java. 534: 441: 431:). Total downloads from Sourceforge over the project lifetime are close to 80,000 150: 688: 654: 556:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
511: 479: 444: 363: 284: 470:- The number of installations is not really relevant to Knowledge (XXG)'s 634: 604: 420: 429: 358:
for me to comment, but JAMWiki gets about 1000 downloads a month
706:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
609:
an article on "Collaborative trust evaluation for wiki security"
257: 434:, so combining that with downloads from other sources (such as 25: 426: 474:. What is needed is signfiicant coverage in independent 354:
As the software's author hopefully it isn't considered
146: 142: 138: 256:
because it cannot be freely edited by anyone, same as
210: 607:but it isn't in depth. There is some evidence that 563:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 224: 72:). No further edits should be made to this page. 720:). No further edits should be made to this page. 645:is not an argument, and look at the lists at 531:list of Software-related deletion discussions 8: 529:Note: This debate has been included in the 528: 45:For an explanation of the process, see 637:. Also, if we can bring ourselves to 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 81:. All "keep" opinions conflict with 41:deletion review on 2013 February 5 24: 29: 47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review 1: 697:11:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC) 682:17:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 663:10:57, 28 January 2013 (UTC) 622:05:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC) 592:00:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC) 543:19:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC) 520:14:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC) 506:14:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC) 488:17:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC) 453:18:55, 21 January 2013 (UTC) 399:18:20, 21 January 2013 (UTC) 372:16:24, 21 January 2013 (UTC) 342:16:19, 21 January 2013 (UTC) 303:14:18, 20 January 2013 (UTC) 270:10:50, 20 January 2013 (UTC) 244:02:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC) 99:11:04, 2 February 2013 (UTC) 647:Comparison of wiki software 752: 736:Pages at deletion review 709:Please do not modify it. 279:. If you want to delete 61:Please do not modify it. 651:List of wiki software 321:few or no other edits 472:inclusion guidelines 323:outside this topic. 641:the guideline that 643:other stuff exists 77:The result was 594: 590: 545: 324: 293:comment added by 283:, why not delete 97: 53: 52: 39:was subject to a 743: 711: 587: 581: 574: 572: 567: 562: 558: 476:reliable sources 306: 305: 229: 228: 214: 166: 154: 136: 96: 94: 87: 63: 33: 32: 26: 751: 750: 746: 745: 744: 742: 741: 740: 726: 725: 724: 718:deletion review 707: 585: 577: 568: 565: 551: 288: 171: 162: 127: 111: 108: 90: 88: 83:WP:V#Notability 70:deletion review 59: 37:This discussion 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 749: 747: 739: 738: 728: 727: 723: 722: 703: 702: 701: 700: 699: 666: 665: 624: 597: 596: 595: 560: 559: 548: 547: 546: 526: 525: 524: 523: 522: 491: 490: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 408: 407: 406: 405: 404: 403: 402: 401: 379: 378: 377: 376: 375: 374: 347: 346: 345: 344: 326: 325: 273: 272: 232: 231: 168: 107: 102: 75: 74: 54: 51: 50: 44: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 748: 737: 734: 733: 731: 721: 719: 715: 710: 704: 698: 694: 690: 685: 684: 683: 679: 675: 670: 669: 668: 667: 664: 660: 656: 652: 648: 644: 640: 636: 632: 628: 625: 623: 619: 615: 610: 606: 605:cmscritic.com 602: 599: 598: 593: 588: 582: 580: 573: 571: 561: 557: 555: 550: 549: 544: 540: 536: 532: 527: 521: 517: 513: 509: 508: 507: 503: 499: 495: 494: 493: 492: 489: 485: 481: 477: 473: 469: 466: 465: 454: 450: 446: 442: 439: 436: 433: 430: 427: 424: 422: 418: 417: 416: 415: 414: 413: 412: 411: 410: 409: 400: 396: 392: 389:installs it. 387: 386: 385: 384: 383: 382: 381: 380: 373: 369: 365: 360: 357: 353: 352: 351: 350: 349: 348: 343: 339: 335: 330: 329: 328: 327: 322: 318: 314: 310: 309:84.135.147.45 304: 300: 296: 295:84.135.147.45 292: 286: 282: 278: 275: 274: 271: 267: 263: 259: 255: 251: 248: 247: 246: 245: 241: 237: 227: 223: 220: 217: 213: 209: 205: 202: 199: 196: 193: 190: 187: 184: 181: 177: 174: 173:Find sources: 169: 165: 161: 158: 152: 148: 144: 140: 135: 131: 126: 122: 118: 114: 110: 109: 106: 103: 101: 100: 95: 93: 84: 80: 73: 71: 67: 62: 56: 55: 48: 42: 38: 35: 28: 27: 19: 708: 705: 626: 600: 578: 569: 552: 467: 289:— Preceding 276: 249: 233: 221: 215: 207: 200: 194: 188: 182: 172: 159: 91: 78: 76: 60: 57: 36: 631:Mark viking 614:Mark viking 319:) has made 198:free images 92:Sandstein 714:talk page 570:Strikeout 566:Automatic 535:• Gene93k 285:Mediawiki 66:talk page 730:Category 716:or in a 674:Yaron K. 554:Relisted 498:Audriusa 391:Yaron K. 334:Yaron K. 317:contribs 291:unsigned 262:Audriusa 236:Yaron K. 157:View log 68:or in a 601:Comment 421:Liferay 281:JAMWiki 204:WP refs 192:scholar 130:protect 125:history 113:JAMWiki 105:JAMWiki 689:Mcewan 655:Mcewan 639:ignore 468:Delete 443:). -- 356:WP:COI 254:WP:SPS 176:Google 134:delete 79:delete 219:JSTOR 180:books 164:Stats 151:views 143:watch 139:links 16:< 693:talk 678:talk 659:talk 649:and 635:here 627:Keep 618:talk 539:talk 516:talk 512:Whpq 502:talk 484:talk 480:Whpq 449:talk 445:Wrh2 428:and 395:talk 368:talk 364:Wrh2 338:talk 313:talk 299:talk 277:Keep 266:talk 258:DMOZ 250:Keep 240:talk 212:FENS 186:news 147:logs 121:talk 117:edit 226:TWL 155:– ( 732:: 695:) 680:) 661:) 620:) 583:• 541:) 533:. 518:) 504:) 486:) 451:) 440:, 397:) 370:) 340:) 315:• 307:— 301:) 268:) 242:) 206:) 149:| 145:| 141:| 137:| 132:| 128:| 123:| 119:| 43:. 691:( 676:( 657:( 616:( 589:) 586:C 579:T 575:( 537:( 514:( 500:( 482:( 447:( 393:( 366:( 336:( 311:( 297:( 264:( 238:( 230:) 222:· 216:· 208:· 201:· 195:· 189:· 183:· 178:( 170:( 167:) 160:· 153:) 115:( 49:.

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review on 2013 February 5
Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
talk page
deletion review
WP:V#Notability
 Sandstein 
11:04, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
JAMWiki
JAMWiki
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.