Talk:Next.js
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 10 October 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Notability
As a professional web developer, I think Next.js has become notable over the last couple of years.
For example, this live chart of its download rate from npm compares it to its peers -- React (web framework), Angular (web framework), Vue.js, and Gatsby (no Wikipedia page). It is between Angular and Gatsby in popularity and rising.— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
I just wanted to comment that I find it curious how Nuxt.js is considered “notable” while Next.js **isn’t**. If you check their GitHubs, Next.js has twice as many stars, slightly more commits, and about three times as many contributors. --65.246.71.80 (talk) 13:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Well, I believe that both frameworks' articles fail to meet WP:NOTE. There are few reliable sources in both. I'm going to strip off all github links here. Number of starts on GitHub is a reasonable indicator of notability. It may be easily faked by big corps. I think it both should be deleted. I don't mind to adding related information on these to the articles like Comparison of web frameworks though. That's where they belong the most. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 14:47, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Alexander Davronov: You are welcome to help look for new sources or, if you wish, to send the article back to WP:AfD, but please note that one closed recently (can be seen at the top of this page) and if you do not have any new arguments for its deletion, it will not succeed and would likely be almost immediately closed. Notability does not require a minimum number of sources and WP:NSOFT gets a decent amount of weight in software deletion discussions. As far as I can tell, Next.js passes both and the community seems to agree. Also, I believe Comparison of web frameworks should probably be deleted, as it is both irreparably obsolete and generally not notable; it's like a giant comparison between apples, oranges, and crude oil and I don't think that is more helpful than having articles for the notable titles. What do you mean by stripping off the github links? I believe all the links that point to GitHub are currently appropriate, but that doesn't mean I didn't overlook something. Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions, happy editing! Footlessmouse (talk) 22:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this draft duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2019/02/rendering-on-the-web. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. SITH (talk) 20:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class JavaScript articles
- Unknown-importance JavaScript articles
- Start-Class Websites articles
- Unknown-importance Websites articles
- Start-Class Websites articles of Unknown-importance
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Websites articles
- Articles edited by connected contributors