Talk:Creole (markup)

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

A note on recreation

This article was previously deleted. I have restored and expanded it. Had I seen the original deletion debate, I would have commented there that if the Association for Computing Machinery, the world's most distinguished scientific and educational computing society, has seen fit to publish a paper by the authors of the Creole standard, then it is hardly our place to decree that it is not, in fact, notable. — Hex (❝?!❞) 12:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is something called Wikipedia:Deletion review, though. I am not entirely convinced that Creole is notable as in encyclopedic-notable, although it is surely ACM-notable and wiki-developer-notable. I am considering to drag it to afd again (note; not WP:CSD#G4 - recreation of deleted material) as there seems to be material from only ACM and themselves in the article, but I will look into it more closely before that. Plrk (talk) 00:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean, but it was raised there before once, and someone commented that DRV "is not, for the most part, a venue to advance new arguments (or re-advance old ones) which should properly have been made at the AFD discussion". If it goes to AfD again, I will say there what I said above. Thanks for your concern. — Hex (❝?!❞) 01:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

xpage wiki

Now it supports also creole http://www.openntf.org/Projects/pmt.nsf/1af5f59bae92986c85256bae000f898c/896c56b4ae4548358625758c0063e306!OpenDocument —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.27.238.165 (talk) 22:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who uses it?

When I read this, I wonder what it's claiming:

As of late 2008, wiki engines that have implemented full or partial support for Creole include Oddmuse, MoinMoin, DokuWiki, TiddlyWiki, JSPWiki, PmWiki, PodWiki, XWiki.[5], EuWiki, Ikiwiki, and Hatta.

Does that mean they have Creole as an option, or that it's the default markup?

The sentence would be technically true in either case, but misleading if it's not the default markup in all those wikis. Gronky (talk) 22:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the default markup for most of them. It is an option for Oddmuse, MoinMoin, DocuWiki, TiddlyWiki, PmWiki, PodWiki, IkiWiki. It is (mostly, with some variation) the default for Hatta. The others I am not sure about. There are actually not many wikis yet that have creole as the default - certanly not most of the "popular" wikis such as Wikipedia. But it is new ... NevarMaor (talk) 03:12, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Creole is the only, thus the default, markup for EuWiki. It uses a superset of the v1.0 edition of creole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Derek Parnell (talk • contribs) 02:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A variation of Creole is also used in the Zim Desktop Wiki. It is based more on docuwiki markup but does have many similarities to Creole. NevarMaor (talk) 05:08, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Creole (markup). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100625163143/http://creoledit.users.sourceforge.net:80/ to http://creoledit.users.sourceforge.net/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]