Talk:WikiToLearn

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because of extended coverage from indipendent blogs, mainstream national radio and press (most notable links: half a page of the newspaper Il Giorno (newspaper) and 40 minutes on Radio Popolare). WikiToLearn (under the old WikiFM name) has also been influential in scholarly environments (see the presentation of HEP Software Foundation at CHEP 2015) and is currently the largest combined effort (in number of volunteers) of the KDE project. --Ruphy (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, if there's coverage that I missed. Note that blogs aren't generally considered reliable sources. It was my impression that HEP, like all the other sources provided in the article, isn't independent of WikiToLearn. —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:24, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that we have to consider that the project is an open source oriented project, so - as any other project in the field - the main communication methods are blog posts, mailing lists and wikis. Also, considering this project a website (even if it is a website too) is limiting and missleading, I really think should be considered more an open source project than a website, given it's nature. That said, I would like to point out that the the A7 speedy delete criteria affirms that there is no *credibly indication of the importance or significance of the subject*. I would argue (as written in the page about it) that is possible for something to be significant even with no source at all (while WikiToLearn has sources, maybe not 100% reliable, but are present). With this being said, I think it would be wrong to delete this page. Fale (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Evaluation of the notability of a project isn't based on the vehicles of communication employed by the people engaged in it. If the only mentions of a project outside of its participant group is blog posts, mailing lists, and wikis, then the project probably won't be considered notable. Compare Apache, Drupal, jQuery. As ambitious as each of those projects was, none of them would have been judged notable before having received sufficient outside note in reliable sources. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, and this project has been mentioned and spoken about in national newspaper, on national radios, on relevant website (HEP) for the field, and in international conventions, so I think there is much more than "only blog posts, mailing lists, and wikis" Fale (talk) 12:56, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem :-) to clarify: HEP Software Foundation is indipendent from WTL, and simply presented WikiToLearn at CHEP 2015 as a possible solution to their training problems. A few months later they started to populate it with content, you may argue whether they are contributors or users, but it is a subsequent event. In any case, the sources which in my opinion clear out any notability issues are the coverage on the national mainstream media (linked in the page as extenral links). Quoting from notability criteria: The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites. --Ruphy (talk) 14:25, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

New horizons library of our learning chapter
Created by: Frank Jesus Gonzales ® 2024∅… 172.56.209.54 (talk) 07:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)