# What do you think about DeepWiki for ParaView?
**URL:** https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359
**Category:** ParaView Support
**Tags:** wiki, documentation
**Created:** [December 10, 2025, 8:49am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359 "2025-12-10T08:49:37Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@CsatiZoltan](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/CsatiZoltan)
#### Post date: [December 10, 2025, 8:49am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359/1 "2025-12-10T08:49:37Z")
Hi,
Recently, my web searches frequently recommend [DeepWiki](https://deepwiki.org/) for programming topics. I noticed that [ParaView is indexed](https://deepwiki.com/Kitware/ParaView) in the wiki. At the bottom of the page, you can type a question. There are two main sections in the generated answer: _Fast_ and below it _Codemap_. The _Fast_ section is more an overview, with some extracted code, while _Codemap_ writes concrete code for your question. I gave it a try by asking _how to write a custom application?_ [Here is the result](https://deepwiki.com/search/how-to-write-a-custom-applicat_7b53ed7e-b7bf-4f68-bf4b-8a15a8139cae). I chose this question because I have some experience in this topic so that I can partially validate what the AI generates. My impressions:
- I am quite satisfied with the _Fast_ section. It successfully recognized that the `paraview_client_add` CMake macro is responsible for building the client executable, and classified the parameters as required and optional. It also recognized that the ParaView-specific `pqApplicationCore` must be provided in addition to the standard Qt class `QApplication`. It “understood” that the ParaView GUI can be thought of as a [pre-made client](https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/tree/master/Clients) and showed it as an example. Finally, I appreciated that all the claims it made are supported by actual code of the ParaView code base. So the _Fast_ section can be useful to discover unknown topics.
- The code in the _Codemap_ section is on the other hand not very usable in my opinion. It is overly verbose. One can write much more succinct code by following the examples of [Examples/CustomApplications](https://gitlab.kitware.com/paraview/paraview/-/tree/master/Examples/CustomApplications) (which the AI failed to find).
My questions to ParaView core developers or people with deep knowledge of ParaView:
1. Do you think that the [main page of the wiki](https://deepwiki.com/Kitware/ParaView) is technically correct (I am not asking to read everything, just a few sections)? If not correct, at least it properly grasps the main concepts?
2. If you ask questions in the prompt, are you satisfied with the results?
3. Do you think that DeepWiki is useful for ParaView programmers, or it is just the usual AI slop?
---
### Author:  [@mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/mwestphal)
#### Post date: [December 10, 2025, 8:54am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359/2 "2025-12-10T08:54:03Z")
Looks like slop to me, some info is correct, some is not, global architecture is wild, BSD license is not respected at all and they point github repo, not gitlab repo.
Don’t rely on such system, because it means proper doc will be left to rot imo.
---
### Author:  [@CsatiZoltan](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/CsatiZoltan)
#### Post date: [December 10, 2025, 9:04am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359/3 "2025-12-10T09:04:40Z")
Thanks for the validation. This is my opinion too, in general for LLM answers.
> they point github repo, not gitlab repo
Probably because somebody fed the GitHub mirror to DeepWiki. GitHub is simply more popular than GitLab, as demonstrated by the almost ten times more stars (not that it measures the value of a software).
> BSD license is not respected
What do you mean?
> because it means proper doc will be left to rot imo
I.e. people will use the AI-generated nonsense instead of reading (and potentially contributing to) the official documentation?
---
### Author:  [@mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/mwestphal)
#### Post date: [December 10, 2025, 10:14am UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359/4 "2025-12-10T10:14:37Z")
> [@CsatiZoltan](#):
>
> people will use the AI-generated nonsense instead of reading (and potentially contributing to) the official documentation?
Developers are writing the docs (that are actually used to feed such llm system) however, if nobody reads them, why bother writing them, right ?
And indeed, user reading docs find missing info, inconsistencies and actually fix them, which is good for everyone.
---
### Author:  [@mwestphal](https://discourse.paraview.org/u/mwestphal)
#### Post date: [December 10, 2025, 4:03pm UTC](https://discourse.paraview.org/t/what-do-you-think-about-deepwiki-for-paraview/17359/5 "2025-12-10T16:03:29Z")
> [@CsatiZoltan](#):
>
> > BSD license is not respected
>
> What do you mean?
As usual with AI tools, data is scraped and then provided to user without providing the source of the data nor respecting the license of the data, which here is BSD licensed which would mean mentioning the Kitware copyright everywhere.