When comparing Wintersmith vs Sitegen, the Slant community recommends Wintersmith for most people. In the question“What are the best static site generators?” Wintersmith is ranked 4th while Sitegen is ranked 28th. The most important reason people chose Wintersmith is:
Wintersmith has an extensive Markdown support. Default, it is rendered by [Marked](https://github.com/chjj/marked). However there are plugins available for [others](https://github.com/jnordberg/wintersmith/wiki/Plugins) (such as [Markdown-it](https://github.com/dwaite/wintersmith-markdown-it)).
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Templating engine comes with Jade plugin and many third-party plugins.
Pro Very flexible
Wintersmith only has a predefined directory structure, everything else can built any way you want.
Pro Built on node.js
Node.js is a software platform for scalable server-side and networking applications.
Pro Easy configuration
You configure the site with a site.moon file. It is written in MoonScript.
Pro Powerful templating
It uses the cosmo templating language. It enables you to inject stuff into the page as it is being generated.
Pro Extendable through plugins
It has a plugin system. It comes bundled with some plugins already, like syntax highlighting. You can write your own plugins.
Pro HTML and Markdown
Pages and templates can be written in HTML or Markdown
It's pretty easy to get started with.
Con Thin and disorganized documentation
The documentation for Wintersmith is lacking examples and clear explanations. It's also quite disorganized, making it difficult to find what you're looking for.