Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cowboy coding

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cowboy coding

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

"Cowboy-" anything can mean "reckless and irresponsible." The meaning is no different when applied to code. It is not a Software Development Philosophy any more than doing anything badly is a philosophy. The only other "source" for this term is a circular reference back to this Wikipedia page. This article is entirely original (or a joke) and should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GlenPeterson (talk • contribs) 00:15, 24 July 2015‎

Keep The term is commonly used and there are sources. The article never calls it a software development philosophy. More could be added, but AfD isn't the route to go to get those. I'm not sure why nominator stated that in nomination rational. I checked StickyMinds.com and there are many sources there, unfortunately most are restricted to members (I am one and membership is free). A simple Google search shows sever RSes in the first ten returned. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have completed this incomplete and malformed nomination and inserted it into today's list of nominations. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "Cowboy coding" is not simply a generic "cowboy-" prefix/adjective applied to "coding" as the nominator suggests. It is an established concept in the realm of software development. A Google book search for "cowboy coding" returns 275 hits, many of which are reliable sources establishing notability. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 18:05, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·E·C) 01:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Keep The fact that it's a bad methodology doesn't mean that it's not a popular methodology. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.