GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki - Open Source PR Review Scorecard

Karpathy's LLM Wiki implementation plugin for Obsidian - turns notes and PDFs into a linked, LLM-powered knowledge base with entity pages, concept pages, graph-powered Q&A, and local-first privacy.

C-Rank Grade: S (Elite) - 70/100

External PR Merge Rate: 89%

Response Time: -

First Timer Success: 80%

Frequently Asked Questions

Is GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki has a recorded first-timer success rate of 80.0%. Repositories ranked S typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

Maintainers in GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki respond to incoming external pull requests in approximately 0.0 hours on average. Keeping PRs focused on single tasks and ensuring tests pass helps maintainers review faster.

What does the 70.2 C-Rank™ score (S Tier) represent?

The C-Rank™ system evaluates GitHub projects on a 0–100 scale using real data: PR merge rates, review turnaround time, active maintainer presence, and first-time contributor success. A score of 70.2 places GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki in the S tier.

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki?

The external contributor pull request merge rate for GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki is 89.5%, based on public PR activity from non-core contributors.

Are there Good First Issues available in GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki?

GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki currently has 4 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels like "good first issue", "beginner", or "up-for-grabs".

GD4AI
GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wikiS•Elite700
GitHub
Back to Explorer
GD4AI

GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki

700
Active (30d)S•Elite(70/100)TypeScript

Karpathy's LLM Wiki implementation plugin for Obsidian - turns notes and PDFs into a linked, LLM-powered knowledge base with entity pages, concept pages, graph-powered Q&A, and local-first privacy.

GitHub
Compare••
Jump to:

AI Maintainer Review Guidelines

Review Persona

Welcoming Community Builder

Warmth Score
8.0/10
Patience Score
8.2/10
Nitpick Rate
45%

Collaborative maintainer environment in GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki. Reviews community pull requests with focus on project quality.

What Contributors Actually Say

Discussions in GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki focus heavily on practical implementation feedback, code formatting standards, and issue reproduction details.

Hidden Friction Signals

Unlinked PRs without issue context and changes that fail automated test suites face the highest review friction.

Unwritten Rules

  • •1) Keep PR scope strictly aligned with the linked issue.
  • •2) Ensure local linters pass before opening a review.
  • •3) Maintain full test coverage for modified logic.

Top PR Submission Do's

  • •Add or update tests for changed behavior before requesting review
  • •Run the repository formatter and linter locally
  • •Update docs or README when behavior changes

Top PR Friction Pitfalls (Don'ts)

  • •Do not leave requested test coverage unresolved
  • •Do not submit formatting-only noise with feature changes
  • •Do not ship user-facing changes without matching docs
Response Velocity
-
No reviewer activity recorded

Average Response Latency

Tracks hours until a maintainer leaves a review, comment, or PR response.

Merge Efficiency
89.5%
High acceptance rate for external PRs

External Acceptance Rate

Percentage of community pull requests successfully merged into main.

First-Timer Success
80.0%
Strong first-timer PR acceptance rate

First PR Conversion

Rate at which developers submitting their first repository PR succeed.

Active Maintainers
7 core
Highly collaborative maintainer core
Diagnostic Health HUD
89.5%
Merge Gauge
80.0%
1st-Timer
Community Vibe60/100

Embed C-Rank Badge

Show contributors that your repository actively reviews and merges external pull requests.

GetMerged C-Rank badge for GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki
[![GetMerged C-Rank](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/api/badge/GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki)](https://getmerged.abhishekco.de/GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki?utm_source=github&utm_medium=badge)

Active Good First Issues (5)

View on GitHub

The capability this issue asks for: pnpm typecheck reports zero errors under TypeScript 6.0.3, and Gate 1 passes with typescript@6 installed. Until that holds, the bump cannot land. How the tracking surface disappeared. #770 (dependabot, 5.9.3 to 6.0.3) was closed on 2026-10-07 after its Gate 1 failed, and dependabot now ignores 6.x. That was the right call for the PR — it cannot pass — but it left the work itself with no issue, so this one records it. The failure is real, not a flake. Run 35511539309 on 05825f49 fails at the Five-Gate step with 31 errors across 14 files. Four error codes: Code Count Meaning TS2345 25 argued type not assignable to the parameter TS2564 4 property has no initializer and is not definitely assigned TS2430 1 interface incorrectly extends another TS2322 1 type not assignable to target type Files, with the first error of each: src/main.ts(70,72,73,74) TS2564 settings, wikiEngine, schemaManager, autoMaintainManag

📅 Opened Oct 7, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

The problem The READMEs tell users what to type into Obsidian's command palette, and in ten of the eleven locales they tell them to type English. Every locale has a translated command name. src/texts/ja.ts registers cmdViewHistory: '取り込み履歴を表示', de.ts has 'Ingestionsverlauf anzeigen', ru.ts has 'Просмотр истории операций'. But docs/README_JA.md, README_DE.md and the rest quote View Ingestion History — a string that does not appear anywhere in that language's UI. So the instruction is unusable in exactly the languages that needed translating. This became visible when #780 corrected the English string (View Ingestion History → View operation history, matching src/texts/en.ts:537). That fix was right and is now merged. The other ten files still quote English, so for them it changed one wrong string into another wrong string. Scale English command names per translated README, counted by matching "Cmd+P/Ctrl+P" → "Some English Words": README

📅 Opened Oct 3, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 100/100Contribute

What ai 6 → 7 with the provider packages moved in step. Filed because Dependabot's PR cannot express this: #728 bumps @ai-sdk/openai-compatible alone, and that cannot compile. The measurement Rebuilt on current main with pnpm add @ai-sdk/[email protected] and nothing else touched: src/llm-sdk/openai-compat-sdk-client.ts(298,5): error TS2322: Type 'LanguageModelV4' is not assignable to type 'LanguageModel'. Type '"v4"' is not assignable to type '"v2"'. @ai-sdk/[email protected] depends on @ai-sdk/[email protected] → specification v4 [email protected] declares type LanguageModel = GlobalProviderModelId | LanguageModelV3 | LanguageModelV2 → takes v3 at the newest ai@latest is 7.0.107 The repo currently pins @ai-sdk/[email protected], @ai-sdk/[email protected], [email protected]. All three move together or none does. Why it is not a routine bump Three things in the 3.0.0 line land on code we wrote on purpose: 74d520f: feat: migrate providers to support new top-level 'reasoning' parame

📅 Opened Sep 20, 2026💬 2 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

What writeFileWithIntent returns void, so a caller cannot tell an update from a skip. Once LINT_WRITE_INTENT became create: false (#750, commit e6b80a96), a lint write can decline — and both fixers report it as done. The scenario is the one #750 is about. A cancelled ingest deletes a summary page during a lint run's LLM batch; the write is now correctly skipped, because create: false keeps the completion marker from coming back; and the lint log keeps a permanent record of a fix applied to a page that no longer exists. Two sites, both reporting a fix that did not happen: Alias completion (fix-runners.ts:147) returns success: true, so filled++ runs, "added N aliases (total M)" goes into results, controller.ts:302 sees filled > 0 and calls generateIndexFromEngine() plus logLintFix('Complete Aliases', …), and the completion Notice reports N/M. Retag (fix-runners.ts:624) returns kind: 'fixed' with an [old] → [new] message, where kind: 'missing' is the accurate answer — that is wha

📅 Opened Sep 20, 2026💬 0 comments
Quality: 90/100Contribute

The measurement that started this @DocTpoint rebuilt a 413-note vault unattended over three days on v1.27.1: 413 source pages and 2,135 entity/concept pages. Three numbers from that rebuild describe the shape of the graph this plugin produces: 95 % of edges connect pages born from the same note. Plain co-occurrence reproduces 94.5 % of the Related edges. Nine of ten pages have no incoming link from a page with another source. The Related cap holds with zero violations and strays sit at 1 % — the shaping is working exactly as written. Then a null model over five multi-note questions — same character budget, same model, thinking off, truth drawn from the notes and rated blind: Arm Retrieval over Result A raw notes, embedding index baseline B wiki pages, same index slightly ahead of A C the plugin's query path lost 3 of 5 questions B ≥ A is the first evidence this project has that the compiler is not a detour — the wiki stores the notes at least as well as the raw

📅 Opened Sep 16, 2026💬 10 comments
Quality: 75/100Contribute
Looking for more TypeScript beginner tasks?Explore TypeScript GFI

Contributor Community Vibe Feedback

Rate what actually matters after opening a pull request here.

Have you contributed to this repo?

Rate your first-hand PR experience (review speed, maintainer responsiveness, and onboarding ease) to help other contributors.

3 ratings required
Maintainer helpfulness
Review speed
Beginner friendliness

Contributor Compatibility & Review Speed Analysis for GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki

When evaluating whether to contribute to GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki, response velocity and maintainer engagement are crucial. GetMerged continuously tracks pull request trajectories, first-comment latency, and code review rounds to help developers avoid submitting pull requests to backlogged repositories.

Currently, maintainers of GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki acknowledge new external contributions in approximately -. Out of all submitted pull requests from non-core authors in the last 180-day window, 89.5% were successfully merged into the primary branch.

Frequently Asked Questions - Contributing to GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki

01

Is GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki welcoming to first-time open-source contributors?

GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki has a recorded first-timer success rate of 80.0%. Repositories ranked Elite typically provide actionable feedback during code reviews and actively nurture new community contributors.

02

How fast can I expect code review feedback on my pull request?

The initial maintainer response time averages ~-. Keeping PRs scoped to single concerns and ensuring CI checks succeed will optimize review turnaround.

03

What does the 70.2 C-Rank™ score represent?

The C-Rank™ index scores repositories on a 0 to 100 scale using an objective formula: external PR merge rates, initial response speed, active maintainer count, and first-time contributor retention. A score of 70.2 places GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki in the Elite tier.

04

What is the external contributor pull request merge rate for GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki?

The external pull request merge rate is 89.5%. GetMerged isolates non-core community contributions so external developers get an accurate benchmark of PR acceptance probability.

05

Are there beginner Good First Issues open in GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki?

Yes, GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki currently has 4 active issue(s) tagged with beginner-friendly labels. You can inspect these directly from the repository issues tab.

GetMerged C-Rank™ Indexing Standard

All metrics displayed for GD4AI/obsidian-llm-wiki are automatically retrieved via the public GitHub API and recalculated daily. Insider pull requests submitted by repository owners or organization members are excluded from merge rate calculations to preserve objective external contributor statistics.