Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MojoMojo

MojoMojo

MojoMojo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable software, references consist of non-reliable sources. --AbsolutDan ^(talk) 19:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• Delete as notability is not established. --Boston (talk) 20:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. All references covering MojoMojo are self-published, and therefore do not count towards notability. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 20:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
• Don't delete. If the software is available (particularly if open-source) and usable, then the entry is useful in that it contributes to the completeness of the Wikipedia reviews, and it helps anyone looking for wiki software by providing an evaluation (even if limited). If the software has any new features or a novel grouping of features (as it claims), then retaining the reference to it is useful, and even if the software is not 'notable' for its wide adoption, drawing attention to the novel features may prompt their take-up by other open source products. --Bobhare (talk) 02:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC) — Bobhare (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • You probably need a better argument that "It's WP:USEFUL". Indiscriminate collection of articles on every single obscure musician / society / publication / computer programme might seem "useful" until, but once you consider how prone these articles are to spam, vandalism and inaccurate information that goes unchecked, it's not so useful. There's only a finite number of people on Wikipedia who keep software articles in check, and they only have time to keep an eye on a finite number of articles. The rules on Notability are here for a good reason, and if you're looking for a directory of every open-source application, Wikipedia is not the site you want. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 11:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Full disclosure: I am one of the developers and I do keep an eye on this article for spam, vandalism, and accurate information. Dandv (talk) 23:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
      • Fair enough for disclosing that, but I can't imagine Wikipedia ever reconsidering its notability policy because someone connected with article promises to keep an eye on it, especially not if the vast majority of COI articles are anything to go by. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Don't delete. MojoMojo is listed in Comparison of wiki software, at AppliedStacks and at WikiMatrix. Dandv (talk) 23:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, but other Wikipedia articles never count towards notability, and the other two websites appear to be sites which covers all software of this kind. However, to answer the original objection, the Wikimatrix page appears to be the place for people to go for the list of features rather than Wikipedia. There might be a case for putting a link to Wikimatrix in the Comparison of wiki software article if there isn't one already. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

• Don't delete MojoMojo is one of the most advanced if not the most advanced wiki in the perl language. It also has one of the most flexible and capable authorization layers of any wiki software, allowing control over both editing and viewing. This is an important feature of any wiki and the MojoMojo article should be there if for no other reason than to describe that. I use mojomojo over other wiki software for my business for exactly that reason, I can control who can see and who can edit everything.User:jayk806 —Preceding undated comment added 01:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC). — jayk806 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Delete This article fails notability. Daniel5127 ^(talk) 23:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
  • There are many other wikis listed on Wikipedia, and I don't see how they are any more notable (no external links etc.) Kerika, IpbWiki, JAMWiki, Instiki, WackoWiki, Wiclear and especially DidiWiki. Why is MojoMojo being singled out? Dandv (talk) 23:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
    • Possibly because no-one has got round to nominating them yet. See WP:OTHERSTUFF. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 23:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep (reposted from Talk page) mojomojo is a culmination of Perl programming language's latest technologies, and one of the most modern (in terms of technology, too) perl-based web applications. It's also one of the few complete out-of-the-box open-source example of Catalyst_(software) Lestrrat (talk) 01:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC) — Lestrrat (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.