Re: [dev] AfD discussion of dwm Wikipedia article

From: markus schnalke <>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 10:15:48 +0100

[2010-02-24 08:08] Anselm R Garbe <>
> someone pointed me to this:
> I wouldn't recommend to join that discussion there, such appeals
> usually lead to the deletion.

That does not surprise me, when you read the arguments why to keep the
page. They just do not give relevant points. ``dwm is cool'' ist
simply nothing more than a personal opinion. Seems most people in the
discussion think it would be a poll.

> But perhaps someone has more links to second party sources that
> might convince them to keep the article.

Unfortunately, I haven't done a talk about dwm itself which I could

I think the articles you mentioned are important in the debatte. At
least in uzbl's case articles and talks were important. Haven't you
done an interview too?

From my POV, the most important thing about dwm is that it was dwm
that made tiling WMs interestingly modern. Of course there were ion
and larswm and wmi(i), but dwm pushed the concept to the ``masses''.
Altough dwm itself is not the most used tiling WM, it is the father of
almost all modern tiling WMs. It had and has a huge influence on the
market of tiling WMs. And *this* is the point why dwm should have the
Wikipedia page.

Maybe one should list all WMs that see dwm as their primary influence.

Received on Wed Feb 24 2010 - 09:15:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Feb 24 2010 - 09:24:02 UTC