Talk:Notepad++

message: This isn't cited and I've gone through the whole plugin list trying to find which plugin does this.  Can someone either cite this or remove the reference?  All I can find is the notion that potentially, multiple-line regular expressions could be handled by a plugin, not that they are. 130.101.163.114 (talk) 17:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiline Regex?

message: It seems as though everything after the first two paragraphs should be put into a Features section.  Furthermore, the list of programming languages and list of translations should be replaces with a quantitative statament (ie Notepad++ supports XX languages) with a link to the official list cited as a reference.  Any thoughts?  Objections?  --Hamitr 02:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Features Section 

message: This certainly seems notable enough to warrant an article. There are innumerable less-noteworthy subjects on Wikipedia. Lots of people use and recommend this application. As it happens, I stumbled across this article while researching open-source text editors for Windows. Isn't research the sort of thing one uses an encyclopedia for? -- 208.255.162.94 18:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Something that is notable is ... well ... noted.  I personally have not found any reliable sources that note Notepad++.  Have you?  --Iamunknown 18:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia has numerous pages that lack "reliable sources". Why single out this one? creativename | Matum u mok-aan! Matum u shara-hai agh golug-hai! 04:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not regarded as a valid argument to keep an article.  Plenty of articles exist on Wikipedia that probably should not; so see first if you can improve them, and if not, delete them.  --Iamunknown 06:04, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Notepad++ is used by programmers, there is a lot of evidence that programs really like Notepad++ (download.com has 62 votes all 5/5 ) a lot of the statements (like features) do not require citation as it is not disputable, however as some people still want citation, I suggest just looking at its site, or downloading it and have the feature hit you in the face. --Adam1213 Talk + 05:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Number 16 top download on sf.net, above MiKTeX, Audacity, and phpBB. --Amir E. Aharoni 08:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Number 4 top forum posts on sf.net --Adam1213 Talk 01:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

text: It is very notable: it is widely recommended in online forums and computer magazines for creating/ editing Web pages with HTML.  One could even argue that it is the industry standard for this role. Dogru144 (talk) 16:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can get a couple of those mags and lay out some citations we'll be all set on the "notability" front. padillaH (review me)(help me) 13:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

text: For what it's worth users on the popular programming Q&A site Stack Overflow frequently recommend Notepad++ as their text editor of choice (for example in this question the two most popular answers recommend Notepad++) although I'm this doesn't exactly count as a citation.  On a more personal note I would have been fairly surprised to find Notepad++ didn't have an article as in my experience its a popular choice for a Notepad replacement among programmers. --Kragen2uk (talk) 07:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Notability

message: Does anyone know if there are any user-defined language files for Mediawiki markup? SharkD (talk) 09:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikimedia

message: The sourceforge.net article speaks of notepad++ being boycotted by the Chinese. Should this article elaborate? 82.169.255.79 (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I may be wrong, but the way I read the sourceforge.net article, it was Notepad++ who boycotted China (whatever that means), and then China blocked SourceForge, but there is no indication that China's actions against SF has anything to do with Notepad++.  It may be noteworthy to mention Notepad++'s actions against China, if indeed it amounted to anything more than a claim or a statement on their web site -- leuce (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The boycott of China 

message: This article is well referenced and detailed, offering a substantial amount of information regarding Notepad++.  It may be helpful, however, to offer some short definitions of certain terms used in the stem and later in the article which allude to more technical jargon which would go over the head of the average wikipedia user.  I understand that the majority of these terms are linked to various wikipedia sites which define and explain them (the inherent benefit of wikipedia), but stopping every other word to switch to a different article in an effort to understand the original one may make understanding some key concepts difficult for researchers trying to utilize this article.  Otherwise, this article is well laid out and fairly well referenced.  Are there other sources outside of Notepad++'s homepage that would help verify the information given about its components and compatibility?
Also, in terms of notability, the SourceForge.net site listed as a reference shows a steady decrease in downloads of Notepad++ in the last four months after peaking in November of 2008.  Does this trend imply that it has become so commonplace that most programmers have already downloaded it, or that it is becomming outdated and thus losing notability? Barrettgholland (talk) 22:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: On behalf of the authors, thanks. The only issue with your two suggestions is they would require us to add input and that's against WP policies. It's pretty clear when you read the policy on Original Research that the editors must not add anything to the article that does not come from a third-party source. If you have articles that compare this and other products or an article that explains why the decision was made to leave the product as freeware we'd gladly put it in. But we can't add Original Research to the article. Padillah (talk) 14:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

text: I've reorganized and rewritten it to present general features first and programming ones next. Also rewritten the lead section to note down the important things, other stuff moved to Development. Has the article improved? Is it universally computer friendly? Looks pretty much like "Notepad++ for dummys" to me. -- Tom Jenkins (reply) 15:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writing Style 

message: This article is very well-written, although I think it's content and wording goes above and beyond the average person's knowledge about computers. Perhaps you could add a section describing a "notepad for dummys" or the equivalent. Since most people tend to use Wikipedia to find summaries of complex subjects, this might be useful. Perhpas immediately after the two paragraph introduction, before the contents box you could just add a small blurb that summarizes what Notepad does/is for the average computer user. also, I agree with user Dwhoyle, a brief comparison on the Wikipage in addition to the link to "Comparison of Text editors" might be useful and helpful for Wikipedia users. Overall, I think the entire article is well put-together and terrificly organized. I would only suggest changing a few areas to make it more universally computer friendly. (Rachelp87 (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reorganized and rewritten it to present general features first and programming ones next. Also rewritten the lead section to note down the important things, other stuff moved to Development. Has the article improved? Is it universally computer friendly? Looks pretty much like "Notepad++ for dummys" to me. -- Tom Jenkins (reply) 15:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Technicalities

message: Who is Jason Gilmore? Why is that whole section like a review? Can I rewrite it to present the summary and facts instead of rambling about discussing what Mr. Gilmore thoughts and how they differed from the facts? -- Tom Jenkins (reply) 15:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Gilmore mentioned Notepad++ in a PHP book. I just deleted the whole section, as I didn't think it was a good idea to get into the failings of support for particular languages here. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:20, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  PHP 

message: "Features - General features include: [...] File comparison"
Does that still work correctly resp. does it work correctly again? http://sourceforge.net/p/npp-plugins/discussion/730527/ includes reports like "Change highlighting doesn't work with s... " and "Highlight transparency option - no effect?" which state that file comparison (kind of) broke. Also the ref http://notepad-plus.sourceforge.net/uk/about.php now leads to http://notepad-plus-plus.org/ and does not back up the feature claims anymore. -Quark8967 (talk) 02:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Features: File comparison 

message: Hello
 's images do not obey any known user preference. The logo defaults to 64px and the screenshot to 300px.
Best regards,Codename Lisa (talk) 16:32, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I now realize |logo =  will not, but |image =  does as mentioned here, so the blanket statement "" is incorrect. Better regards,  Mlpearc (open channel) 17:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  The source code of  is open to inspection for everyone. I just checked. It is 300px for all users. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

text: Thank you.  Mlpearc (open channel) 17:55, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox image sizes 

message: Hi,
Does anyone know why I can't update the stable release in the infobox? Wagnerp16 (talk) 07:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello, . Tell us what you tried first. As far as I can tell, nothing is wrong. —Codename Lisa (talk) 09:42, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi , I was trying to update the version number to 7.4 which was released yesterday, but I can't seem to find the specific field to modify it. Wagnerp16 (talk) 10:31, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just go to the article and look at the infobox. In front of the version number, there is hyperlink that reads: "[±]". Click on it. It'll take to version number. And next time, you got stuck doing something with a certain template (in this case, Template:Infobox software), go to the template page and read the documentations for it. It is faster than posting a help request in talk page. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 03:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the assistance. Sorry, I had no idea about the "[±]" symbol or what it did. I assume the article will update with the new information sometime today. Wagnerp16 (talk) 18:00, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stable release 

message: I am having trouble accessing the project website. When I click on the "Download" link in the left sidebar, for example, my browser goes to the nonexistent http:///download/. Has this been discussed before?   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 15:38, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. I can't reproduce this. Everything is fine for me. —Codename Lisa (talk) 20:19, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

text: And works for me. Which link are you following? peterl (talk) 05:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project website 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Notepad++. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090719155339/http://www.computeractive.co.uk/computeractive/downloads/2196837/notepad to http://www.computeractive.co.uk/computeractive/downloads/2196837/notepad
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This external link was removed,, but I've added it back in because it seems relevant and applicable. I'm note sure whether it's got enough notability yet to become it's own page, although it seems like it's heading that way.
I am in no way connected to the project.
There is (a little bit of) coverage for it at:
* https://opensource.com/article/17/12/editing-text-linux-desktop-notepadqq
* https://itsfoss.com/notepadqq-notepad-for-linux/
* https://itsfoss.com/notepad-alternatives-for-linux/
There also seems to be a bit of activity on the support forums at:
* https://plus.google.com/communities/118430810002505082315
It's over 6 years old and the most recent commit was 8 days ago, so it seems real.
* https://github.com/notepadqq/notepadqq
peterl (talk) 22:05, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If you think this product is notable, start a page for it.  But it doesn't belong here.  You've been reverted twice now, and you need to stop spamming this link into an unrelated Wikipedia article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notepadqq 

message: This section strikes me as poorly-sourced trivia.  I don't think it belongs here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Easter eggs 

message: I propose moving the section § History (or parts of it) to the new article Notepad++ version history. Similar articles can be found in the :Category:Software version histories. --Soluvo (talk) 11:12, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be misleading. The current History section isn't a version history. --HSukePup (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

text: I don't think it's big enough to warrant its own page. peterl (talk) 06:06, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Notepad++ version history]]