Wikipedia talk:Haiku about Wikipedia policy

Essay is as an essay does
Not sure why my tag was removed but this page is very obviously an. 15:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If you look up the word "essay" in a dictionary you'll find that very obviously, a poem is not an essay. Must you really wikilawyer and revert war over this?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  15:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well you've found a decent adhoc solution so all is well. 15:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I give bonus points
 * for anyone who converts
 * the tag to haiku.
 *  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  16:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Redundant?
With the new shortcuts added this page is beginning to look a lot like Five pillars and a page or two that I've seen that aren't coming to my mind just this moment. 16:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * The "poem" now has
 * A shortcut to each haiku
 * And policy links PubliusFL 16:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Why the section headings (and corresponding shortcuts)? Well, CSD already has two entries, and without some kind of organization,
 * Multiple haikus
 * On each wiki-policy
 * Are hard to follow.
 * PubliusFL 16:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

IAR
As amusing as it is to ignore the rules of form for a haiku on IAR, I'm just not sure we can allow it. it seems like it's just begging for trouble. Miss Mondegreen talk  09:27, May 26 2007 (UTC)

Technically. I thought I was being so very clever, but at this point it's clear it was just lame soapboxing. I regret my actions. I would like to pre-empt further soapboxing. --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 21:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * getting daft. sorry I started this. []
 * what? the first one is technically perfect (right? I can still count) and I think the second one is ok too, no? []
 * I'm a bit confused now. The first one was problematic because it just wasn't really a haiku and it didn't really make the point that it was ignoring rules.  I wasn't sure why the latter two were reverted--the first one is technically excellent and the second one--well I'm a champion of anti-haikus and this one works.  It might also be good to write an anti-haiku for WP:POINT but it would have to be carefully done, like this one.  Miss Mondegreen  talk  23:35, May 26 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay. As long as we're not going spillover our WT:IAR problems here. I'd hate to be responsible for that.


 * On a technical note, no, I think the first one is just an attempt to "rehabiliate" mine (see edit history) and is not that good. We can do without. The second one's more clever. --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 00:35, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I saw that earlier but didn't do anything. Writing poetry under a wiki just screams bad idea to me.  Editing others' work, removing work....aggh!  I did remove it though--IAR is getting long and it's a stretch with the postraphe and it's a version of yours so....  But still...this whole project seems like such a disaster.  Fun, but a disaster! Miss Mondegreen  talk  08:29, May 27 2007 (UTC)

Nice page but bad haikus
Just because it has seventeen syllables does not mean it's clever --Father Goose 19:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No pivot word nor
 * Any seasonal word means:
 * Not haiku. (Yours too!) --Gwern (contribs) 20:06 10 July 2007 (GMT)


 * Technicality;
 * It is still fun to write them
 * Despite being wrong. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 16:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)