I really don't like when people talk about "Reference Objects" in any form of documentation, as that term makes no real sense. It may be OK in IRC talk to use the terms "value object" vs "ref object" to explain the difference to beginners, but it is not nice there also.
Do we talk ever about "Pointer Objects"? Not that often I think. But of course we could. The fact is, that Nim like many other programming languages has Pointers and References. We can regard References as managed pointers. And Nim has data types, like plain numbers, or Objects and container types like Arrays or sequences. We can access instances of data types by just using their name -- in that case the instance is generally just allocated on the stack. Or we can access instances indirectly by using the name of pointers or references, where the pointers and references itself are generally allocated on the stack. I think Araq generally gets this right in the manual and in the official tutorials, so we should also care a bit more for using correct terms when creating second hand docs.
