The reason for marking for deletion is here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/TiddlyWiki The reason cited is : "Non notable management software. No reliable sources provided, none found besides download links and promo material."
I do not know what kind of sources wikipedia needs in software cases, but I can see a problem with the article structure. There is no breakup of article into sections like introduction, development and ending. Here is a list of sections which might be considered. # Philosophy of TW # Features # Special mention of Tags # Plugins # Adaptations # Tiddlyspot and Tiddlyspace # History # VariousTranslations # Technical info like security issues # Use cases # Comparison with other similar software solutions? What do you guys think? All this can be done,but what about the objection regarding 'sources'. What source can we provide besides direct knowledge had from first hand experience? Isn't first hand experience the best form of knowledge source? Can this be somehow cited in wikipedia articles? Can this google group be cited as a source? On Jan 20, 7:25 am, TonyM <[email protected]> wrote: > Anyone an active Wikipedia contributor. > > I would jump in except the problems appears to be it is not high quality > post. Since I see no problem with it, it needs someone with experience > > This is important for our profile. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
