|WikiProject Free Software / Software / Computing||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
This is a neat little application. Especially if you are writing about complex systems.
It's a shame that it uses a different set of tags than the online Wiki's because it would be useful to be able to use it for writing wiki content offline (while riding the bus, etc) and to paste it when you are online. by foggy, September 05, 2006
Quite the little program, tis be. Extremly useful for my stories I write, to keep track of who did what, why, and when.
This is so like Wikipedia editors. First, there is a big banner: "This article may not meet the general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (December 2009)"
Really? Just what secondary sources need to make this legitimate? It exists, for pity sake!
Then on this talk page we find: "WikiProject Free Software [hide](Rated Stub-Class, Low-importance) Free SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject Free SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Free SoftwareFree software articles WikiProject icon Free software portal v • d • e This article is within the scope of WikiProject Free Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of free software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale."
Why is this less deserving than other software? Isn't this program comparably important? Besides, doesn't the recognition of the free software project contradict the notability rating notice?
If one would check the list of wiki software, one can get even more confused. Why would one commercial program deserve inclusion without complaint, but not free programs? Sounds like a conflict of interest. Someone must be getting payola.
My motivation? I just installed the program but have yet to start it, so I don't know anything about its quality one way or the other. Rather, I am concerned about the lack of consistency and common sense in editing thru-out this subject of wikis. As I compare the other articles here on wiki programs, it seems that there is a lot of inequity in the whole process, and this program is a good example.
interesting stand-alone wiki for GTD
I am just getting comfortable with WikidPad ... the sidebar indexing is both unusual in some ways but very interesting.
I cannot imagine losing track of an item in this wiki !
What it needs is an intro podcast as a tutorial if it is to succeed on Android devices
Just adding a "Search" to a desktop "midden" of file links is no match to this type of node hierarchy ... but I find this tool so much more flexible than say, Python's Leo ... so I may not upgrade to a newer OneNote for my latest Windows after all.
I think the web links with the tutorials currently available should be put into the Eng doc's
G. Robert Shiplett 03:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)