Talk:Nexus (software)

Contested deletion

Hello. Pinging @Deepfriedokra and Alexandermcnabb, as they have been involved in this. Please look at my recent revision comments, not just to "Nexus Repository", but to "Nexus (software)" and "Nexus" as well. Here's a recap of recent events from my point of view:

• I search Wikipedia for "Nexus (software)", as I am considering whether to use Nexus or Artifactory (a competing software program) for my personal use.
• To my surprise, I am redirected to "Nexus 5X", which is apparently a phone, not a piece of software. "Nexus (software)" should clearly should not be redirected to it.
• I look at the history page for "Nexus (software)", and discover two things of note:
  • The next-to-latest revision is a page about the software product I am interested in, albeit a pretty crappy one.
  • The latest revision, which was made merely an hour later, redirects the page to the phone's page, because "No demonstration of notability for this name. Redirect to Nexus 5X which may be a more notable topic. (Google) Nexus brand no longer exists". Even ignoring that this new redirect is plainly not appropriate due to not being to a piece of software, I disagree with the claim that Nexus (the software product) is not notable. It's a widely-used program within its niche (an artifact repository for software development).
• So, I revert the redirect back to the pretty crappy page, which at least has the benefit of being *about the thing in question*.
• As the pretty crappy page is in fact pretty crappy, I start taking a few little steps to make it better:
  • I add in {{tl:software-stub}} and {{tl:unreferenced}}.
  • I add in {{tl:tone}} and {{tl:multiple-issues}}, replace the first two crappy sentences with what I feel is a single better one, and include some appropriate links to other pages.
  • I update the outdated "Vendor link" URL and add it into a new "External Links" section.
  • I move "Nexus (software)" to "Nexus Repository", as that is the actual name of the product, and as there are multiple different software products using the name "Nexus". I also move the associated talk page, and for now at least leave "Nexus (software)" as a redirect to "Nexus Repository".
  • I go to the Nexus page, which is of course a disambiguation page. I see that the software product in question is already present as one of the items in it (in the "Science and technology/Other computing uses" section, but it is not linked. I link it to "Nexus Repository".
• I vainly pat myself on the back for setting everything on the road to Wiki-appropriateness, though of course I did not fully accomplish Wiki-appropriateness by myself in this one little spurt of activity.
• I wake up to find that some (but not all) of these changes of mine were reverted, suggested for speedy deletion, et cetera. Regarding "(but not all)", btw: If I remember correctly, I think the Talk pages are in some wacky state now, given the reversions of the non-talk pages.

In summary:

• I feel very strongly that the current (post-reversion) state of "Nexus (software)", which is that it redirects to the page for some phone, is inappropriate.
• I feel extremely strongly the current (post-reversion) state of "Nexus Repository", which is that it redirects to that same phone page, is inappropriate.
• I feel super-duper strongly that the preexisting page about the actual Nexus Repository software package that had been redirected to the phone's page is crappy.
• I feel fairly strongly that my subsequent modifications to that page were improvements to it.
• I feel super-duper strongly that those improvements were not enough to make the article wonderful and Wiki-appropriate, but that they do help get it towards that goal, especially by attracting the attention of other editors.
• I feel pretty strongly that the Nexus Repository software is notable enough to have its own Wikipedia page.

So, please reconsider this decision. I personally will not be modifying any of these pages any further (though I had intended to, in order to get them more Wiki-appropriate), as I feel that in the light of this decision, I should keep away from them. Thank you. -Rwv37 (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

It was spam. Would need total rewrite cited from reliable, independent sources with a reputation for fact checking." -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Fine. I disagree that it should be removed for that reason; I feel it should be improved for that reason, as I had set out to do. Moreover, I feel that can be done pretty easily by simply removing the few remaining sentences that were originally from the crap article, leaving it a stub (as I have already marked it), and including some citation to its existence and basic description (e.g. to this page about it from IBM's website). But fine.

In any case, I still strongly disagree with the following results of our collective actions here:

1. The page Nexus (software), which obviously should be about a piece of software, is now (once again) a redirect to something that is emphatically not a piece of software, and
2. The page Nexus Repository, which obviously should be about something called "Nexus Repository" (which happens to be a specific piece of software), is now a redirect to something that is emphatically neither named "Nexus Repository" nor a piece of software, specific or otherwise.

These results have not only made the situation worse than it had been after I made my changes (in my opinion), but also pretty undeniably worse than it had been before I made my changes.

-Rwv37 (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I can't offer any beeter advice than sourcing content as I wrote above. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:19, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

{{yp|Rwv37 }} You could of course write a draft via WP:AFC and submit it for review when it is well sourced. Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@Rwv37: yo typo-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@Deepfriedokra: I don't mean any offense, and I imagine it's my fault and not yours, but I feel like maybe you're not fully grokking what I've been trying to say here. Yes, I think there should be a page for the software I've been talking about, but that is not my primary concern here, and I would be fine with there not being such a page. I'm not aching to make such a page, and I'm not asking for advice on how to do so.

In this revision of yours, you introduced an obvious problem to Wikipedia: You redirected a page entitled "Nexus Repository" to a page that is not about something that is even vaguely related to Nexus Repository. This specific problem never existed at any time in the entire history of Wikipedia until your revision.

So yes, sure, I'd like it if there were a page about Nexus Repository -- I don't care all that much about that, but I'd like it. My primary concern here, though is that there is now a page called "Nexus Repository" that is absolutely not about Nexus Repository. Similar issue with "Nexus (software)", which is now absolutely not about any software at all, let alone any software called "Nexus".

As I've said earlier, I will not be modifying any of these pages, as I feel it's inappropriate for me to do so given the sudden drastic response to me having done so. I'll shut up now and remove myself from this conversation.

-Rwv37 (talk) 00:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Third opinion

@AngusWOOF: Hai! seeking third opinion. Current redirect version vs THIS version, Besr -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: ping typo-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 23:45, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Nexus (software) can redirect to Nexus (disambiguation)#Science and technology since there are multiple computing uses and phone uses

Nexus Repository can redirect to Software repository

If you need further discussion, you can issue an RFD, but I would redirect in this manner. I don't see anything specific to Nexus 5X for these two. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I've boldly moved this back to Nexus (software) and will redirect to the disambiguation page. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:17, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Rwv37, if you feel like the product needs its own page, I would create a draft for Nexus Repository and explore providing more external news references to show independent notability from Software repository. Note that Sonatype doesn't even have a page, and would redirect to its parent company Vista Equity Partners. Sonatype or Vista Equity would then have to mention Nexus Repository as a major product for it to attract the redirect per MOS:DABMENTION. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:28, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, late to this. Thanks, AngusWOOF, that seems elegant to me. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:51, 9 April 2023 (UTC)