Talk:Emacs
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Emacs article. 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 |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 years  |
 | Emacs is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||
 | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 4, 2004. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Former featured article | |||||||||||||
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Author Images
editHow is it that 2/3 authors have their photographs on the page? It seems appropriate to have all three or none. 209.161.228.135 (talk) 01:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
- who is the third author? The article says there are two authors. both their pictures are present. there's even a picture of another developer who implemented EMAXlCS somewhere. 2601:547:B04:1D9E:D8C2:395C:9519:8266 (talk) 02:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
- "Steele and Stallman's finished implementation"
- The article actually mentions three authors, but is very unclear about David Moon's role. 2600:8802:5913:1700:3955:6DC8:9B6:DD5C (talk) 08:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Let's propose (non-automatic, of course) redirection to vim, and vice verca
editJust look at the Google output when you google for "emacs" or "vi" -- in both cases, they suggest you meant the opposite, almost correcting you. Obviously, intentionally. I find this really funny, and maybe we may include this joke here as well, for the sake of The Editor War and increasing reader's mood 95.165.149.179 (talk) 21:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Emacs Pinky
editThe section is large, and it has multiple cites. There are multiple problems, however:
- The first cite no longer exists; even archive.org has no copy (though I can't say that with certainty; for some reason archive.org scans the page endlessly, without results; I only did a random sampling)
- Few of the sources could be characterized as reliable. Most of them link to EmacsWiki. A lovely site, but wiki's are user-generated content, and only very rarely acceptable as a reliable source.
- Last, and most important imho, is that wikipedia is not a "howto" site. Most of the entries are prescriptive; that's not what the article is here for.
I would propose just removing the entire section. Lest there be any misunderstanding, I use emacs every day, and have done so since the 1980's. It's my editor of choice. I have suffered emacs pinky at times. But it's not such an enormous issue that we need a nearly entirely anecdotal section dedicated to it. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
"Unlike most modern text editors, TECO used separate modes"
editEh? This is very much like vi and other modal editors. The paragraph ends with "This behavior is similar to that of the program ed" -- the editor from which vi was derived (via ex). vi was the "visual" version of ed. If the point of this paragraph is simply that TECO was a line editor rather than a visual buffer editor, there are far better ways of expressing/explaining it than conflating that distinction with the modal/modeless distinction. -- 2600:8802:5913:1700:3955:6DC8:9B6:DD5C (talk) 08:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)