Talk:Neovim
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Neovim redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | The contents of the Neovim page were merged into Vim (text editor) on 18 February 2016 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
"Improvements"
[edit]Most of the sources are written by the developers. TEDickey (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
A number of them, yes. Referencing version https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neovim&oldid=704340572 , though - refs #2 (vimcasts), #3 (bountysource, started by developer so I'd concede this if you disagree), #4 (floobits), #8 (Geoff) are not neovim developers. Are the alternative frontend developers, otherwise unassociated with neovim, considered developers? (Refs #5, #6).
What kind of coverage would you consider sufficiently notable here? I've looked through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability but don't see many hard and fast rules.
Thanks for your time! 71.185.85.170 (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
- Independent reviews by well-known, knowledgeable individuals, of course. Start with the guidelines for reliable sources, third-party sources, and notability TEDickey (talk) 00:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
- Based on my reading of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Definition_of_published then, something like https://floobits.com/help/plugins/nvim is probably on the cusp of counting (unrelated commercial enterprise that happens to publish information about a product integration), but something like http://vimcasts.org/blog/2014/03/support-neovim/ probably doesn't (looks indistinguishable from a self-published source; vimcasts is a commercial business but I'm not exactly convinced that the blog is all that official, even if I like vimcasts). If that's about right, I do not know any reliable published sources pertaining to neovim that are viable for building a page around. 71.185.85.170 (talk) 01:26, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Merge to Vim
[edit]I have proposed to merge this article into Vim (text editor). Discussion about the proposal should be continued at Talk:Vim (text editor)#Merge from Neovim. — Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 13:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Bram wouldn't like that at all.124.168.187.178 (talk) 15:19, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
- Bram is welcome to cast his own !vote. Msnicki (talk) 15:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)