Talk:Yak shaving/Archive 1

keep
I'd like to see this entry remain. I was actually about to go write this article if it didn't exist. I see this term being used more and more often. -- Clayton O'Neill - 24.28.194.112 17:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I do claim to have coined the term, but I wouldn't mind if the article was deleted. It is a neologism (I started using it around 1997, vaguely inspired by a Ren and Stimpy rerun), and it does seem more like a dictionary entry (it is in Wiktionary and the Jargon File). The pointer to Jeremy Brown's GSB message from 2000 was the earliest public dissemination of the term, but it had been in limited use at the MIT AI Lab (not the Media Lab, as incorrectly mentioned in some references) for at least three years before then. I'm a Wikipedia newbie (and aware of the Vanity guidelines), so I'll err on the side of not editing the article myself. Carlin 23:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I think this entry should stay. I found it useful. -- Flow 00:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

tag removed

 * One year old
 * From the above discussion this article needs another tag.
 * Personal remark: i am totally equilateral to the removal of the article.
 * As an inclusionist, the motto is: more is better than less.
 * But obviously, this is another "legend in its own mind" article. The expression "yak shaving" is between the remarkably not informative (since it needs more than 20 lines to explain it) and the pseudo Monty python. Poor effort.
 * In all fairness I could not find the equivalent and the intro is very good.
 * Bottom line, we will come back in 7 years time and see how much progress the MIT saying has made. As they say in Stanford: see and let live the keep on trucking while leaving the pot boiling.

-- Dilane 20:22, 25 December 2006 (UTC)


 * IMO it's useful shorthand for a real phenomenon. I've just read Scott Rosenberg's Dreaming in Code, which uses it fairly frequently to refer to procrastinatory activities on the Chandler project. 62.56.52.163 23:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

cleanup
I cleaned it up as much as can be done. I'd AfD it but it would probably be kept, it's too cute to throw off the dock. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Killing sparrows (talk • contribs) 04:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Why?
Why do we have this useless page? It might have been cute or interesting once, but it's empty. Shouldn't it be truly deleted? —Steve Summit (talk) 16:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not empty. It's a redirect to Wiktionary. Without the redirect, a person looking for information about yak shaving would not know that there's an article about it on Wiktionary. SparsityProblem (talk) 18:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Should we have an entry for every word in Wiktionary that's not in Wikipedia, then? —Steve Summit (talk) 12:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)