Talk:V.next

RFV discussion: September–November 2012
Completely unknown to me. -- Liliana • 11:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Also never heard of this, and the structure is dubious. There is not typically a dot between the 'v' for version and the number (though there might be within the version, e.g. "v2.0"). Equinox ◑ 23:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Difficult to find cites for this, I can't find a search string that filters out most of the false positives. There seems to be some evidence for usage on the internet, but is v.Next being used by Microsoft as a product name?  This seem to imply that it is, and possibly also  and .  On the other hand they may be genuine usages, as might .  I only got one durably archived hit  but I didn't go through all the results - too difficult, too many false positives from variable names etc. Spinning Spark  14:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Capitalization seems to be all over the place, by the way, in typical internet style v.next, v.Next, V.next Spinning Spark  14:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 01:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)