Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/You Ain't Gonna Need It

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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:21, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You Ain't Gonna Need It

Nom as all Original Research. It's a generic phrase that someone wrote from the point of view of a programmer. Two references are a wiki and a personal webpage. Habanero-tan (talk) 10:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. One of the guiding principles of extreme programming and test-driven development. Descriptions of this concept can be found in almost any book on either of the two above subjects. I'd recommend, for example, Scott Ambler & Ron Jeffries Agile Modelling J. Wiley & Sons ISBN 0471202827, or Kent Beck Extreme programming explained. Also see [1] JulesH (talk) 13:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, had to leave quickly earlier and didn't finish the above comment. Beck's book is published by Addison Wesley, ISBN 0201616416. See also Hunt, Thomas (2003). "The trip-packing dilemma [agile software development]". Software. 20 (3). IEEE: 106–107., a peer-reviewed article about this topic. Another peer-reviewed paper is here: Barry Boehm (2002). "Get ready for agile methods, with care" (PDF). Computer. 35 (1). IEEE: 64–69.. The question of how valid the YAGNI principle is is an important research issue in software development methodology at the moment. There's plenty of scope for an article here. JulesH (talk) 17:39, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- With comment to the existing references on the topic; the personal page is that of Ron Jeffries, an acknowledged authority on agile software engineering and the author of a substantial number of books on the topic. Per WP:SPS, his site is reliable for this topic. As for the use of WardsWiki as a source, this is an interesting case because while wikis are not usually accepted as reliable sources, this particular wiki also serves as the home page and public notepad of the original inventors of extreme programming, and is considered the most relevant primary source for information about XP history. I further note that an additional source, distinct from the ones I mention above, has already been added to the article since it was nominated. JulesH (talk) 17:46, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a noteworthy principle from extreme programming. See any of these sources: [2]. I did some cleanup, but I admit that the "Balancing Concerns" section is a bit long-winded and reads like a personal essay. Also, it may not be a bad idea to describe Ron Jeffries' relevance within the article. ←Spidern→ 17:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Based on responses to it that I've read, the balancing concerns section is probably addressed in substantial detail by the first of the scholarly articles I list above. Unfortunately, I'm not an IEEE subscriber so can't access the full text of the article, but if you are you may be able to find some useful stuff to fix that section with in that article. JulesH (talk) 21:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 01:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep per JulesH. This is an important, notable, and widely known concept in programming. If there are sourcing or original research problems in the article, they should be fixed instead of deleting the article. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 15:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 15:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Extreme Programming by application of the principle itself - we don't need a separate article for this phrase. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Such a merge would be inappropriate, as the principle is also used in most forms of test driven development, which is used by a number of methodologies apart from XP, including a large proportion of teams practising Scrum (development), etc. JulesH (talk) 12:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I visited the page today because I wanted to cite wp on the concept of YAGNI. It's an important meme that will develop over time, so I expect the article to grow. And it's good to be able to point people at a succinct article on what it means. Lunkwill (talk) 20:04, 3 April 2009 (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.