Talk:Cowboy coding

message: I have cleaned what seemed to be the most biased or uncertain affirmations. Nontheless, this entry still lacks credible sources.
This article has a strong bias against its subject and reads like FUD spread by people trying to sell more programming-methodology books. It paints in very broad strokes, with pointless phrases like, "typical cowboy coding" - as meaningful as saying, "typical non-blonde", since cowboy coding is mainly defined by what it's *not*. 
Other gems include, "no initial definition of the purpose or scope of the project". So the "typical" cowboy programmer just sits down at the computer and starts typing code without knowing what the program is supposed to do? Please. The article needs a more balanced view than: "You can't write good software if you don't use a strongly defined & enforced programming-methodology. (So go buy more 'Agile' books)."
This article is one big agile advertisement. 216.138.75.50 19:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: Where are the references for the "Advantages" and "Disadvantages" sections?  Who has "characterized", "described" and so forth?  Classic weasel-wording.  Reading this article I get the strong impression that someone is setting up a straw man.  mdf 21:33, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completely unreferenced 

message: As unlikely as this article reads, it's very precise and important to recognize. Most small companies do implement Cowboy Coding - usually under the misnomer of Rapid Application Development. It's risky, but can also be profitable for small companies by keeping the overhead down. It should be recognized, especially when a smaller company begins to grow and try to apply more advanced development cycles.
Most companies would be reluctant to reveal this method to their clients - it's far from impressive. And as the nature of this development method centers around a lack of documentation, it will be challenging to find documentation on the topic, I think. Perhaps a proper survey would accommodate this.
--Fabricari (talk) 15:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You make some good points.  But until there are sufficiently reliable and respected sources outside Wikipedia that can be cited, it is not encyclopedia-worthy.  Wikipedia has aNo Original Research policy.  Do your research, publish a book, or a paper in a scholarly journal, and I'll gladly cite it to resurrect this article.  Until then, I think whatever need there might be for an article for unstructured coding would best be served by adding a section to Rapid Application Development saying that it is sometimes (mis?)used to cover for a lack of any development methodology.--GlenPeterson (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  You did not add the AfD correctly. There are not scholarly journals on the subject, and that's the the threshold for notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note from a Cowboy Coder 

message: I fear some users above have taken this article personally.  Those comments seem so strange to me, as I think it is hard to get emotional about "software design concepts".  I read the article, and then this talk page.  The talk page surprised me.  The article certainly does not seem like an advertizement (maybe it's been updated).  I encourage editors to be "detatched" from this subject, and beware of your edits if you "self-identify" as a cowboy coder.  I have fallen into this anti-pattern before.  It does have a nice property: it makes you feel good at the time. Ace Frahm (talk) 03:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hot Disscussions 

message: Read this to the bottom and perhaps find a way to improve this article, there can be good cowboy and bad cowboy development. I realize I do it in this way, I code it once, find the bugs then recode and refactor it as to completely avoid those problems. Its fast, its easy and it works.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.108.192.90 (talk) 23:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Code and recode 

message: Are there actually people out there proponing Cowboy Programming as the right way to do things? All comments I see here, reflects that it is kind of an inofficial method, but it is called something else, like RAD or so, and some external links reflect over the contents in this article. Isn't Cowboy Programming just a derogatory phrase over a set of less organised and less formalised methods generally perceived as something else? Then the article should treat the topic Cowboy Programming not as a real method, but as a "state of the art" real life situation, kind of, when diverse methods fail. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 20:20, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proponents? 

message: This whole entry seems overdone. Having used the "cowboy" term over the years, I can guarantee that there was never any connotation other than negative. I can't think of a single professional software developer who would use it in any other than a derogatory way. May I suggest this would be a better entry if it were "dumbed way down" to the effect: 
"A jargon term used among professional software developers, referring disparagingly to an undisciplined approach to software development. The term is subjective, relative to the speaker's understanding of some more structured/disciplined (and by implication, superior) approach. As increasing software complexity drove early developers to adopt more disciplined practices, the term came into usage as a reference to "the old way", especially as applied to resistance to the new disciplines.
"The term has reference to the solitary, fiercely independent, and often stubborn cowboys of the American West in the 1800's." 
RobR (talk) 21:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, cowboy is completely unorganized and as such requires more rework than the others you mention. I will never work for a cowboy shop. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much ado about nothing 

message: just tagged this with "not a worldwide view" because this it seems is how people in the usa use
the term cowboy-something.  
someone from the uk (for instance) who uses the term means "someone who produces dodgy work".
The Elves Of Dunsimore (talk) 08:49, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  USA Bias 

message: Seriously?  Wikipedia is going to benefit from an explanation of what 'Cowboy Coding' is?
SERIOUSLY?
Whoever proposed this waste of bandwidth should be kicked out of his mom's basement.  Recommend for deletion  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.76.32.78 (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is the stupidest thing I've seen on the Internet in a long time, and that's saying something 

message: Northeastern US residents sometimes use the term "Cowboy" derogatorily to mean reckless or irresponsible.  Sticking the word "Cowboy" in front of the word "Coding" doesn't make it a software development philosophy.  It just means the same thing as "Cowboy-anything" but applied to code.  This article should be deleted.
--GlenPeterson (talk) 22:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the way this articles phrases it, this term indicates that the programmer is reckless and irresponsible, mostly due its inexperience. --200.225.221.113 (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

text: I just leave two links here: Software development process and Software development. Ushkin N (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommend Deletion 

message: I think the topic is valid, but it is a fictional mode of programming (a red herring) invented by Agile proponents, in order to explain the advantages of the methods that Agile adherents propone. Cowboy coding was never a concept before the Agile proponents invented it, although aspects of it could be common bad practices that Agile tries to get rid of. Perhaps the article should be part of Agile software development? Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 08:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Valid topic, but only as a red herring for Agile proponents 

message: I was taught, and have proceeded to teach this term in regards to code that is generated outside a formal software development process. It is a tried and true concept, possibly born coloquially, but far-reaching and reaching further. I feel this article in its current state is excellent in describing the concept, especially noting that it is a derogatory term. I also question the need of a PRO/Con list, and definitely not one that doesn't list any of the Cons, of which there should be many. 2601:C2:30:104C:B93C:DE0F:E0A6:7129 (talk) 00:39, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I was taught with the term "Cowboy Coding"