Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WackoWiki (2nd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete. Hut 8.5 21:50, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WackoWiki

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional tone, one passing mention in an RS, no other third-party references since creation in 2004, tagged since 2013. Two AFDs (both at that page), one a delete, the second a keep; but not up to scratch in 2016. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WakkaWiki and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WikkaWiki - David Gerard (talk) 22:20, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Last relist Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WackoWiki is a fork of WakkaWiki. Considering that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WakkaWiki closes as delete, it is hard to believe that this is notable. I am unable to find any reliable sources discussing the software except for this which btw is simply a mention that WackoWiki was used. As there is very little third party coverage and I cannot see any indication that the software is popular or widely used, I will go with a delete. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 05:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WakkaWiki. Does not meet individual notability requirements. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:05, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not notable for the same reasons as WakkaWiki; Promotional piece with no evidence of notability. Kierzek (talk) 14:40, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.