Talk:Yellow Pigs Day

Racism?

Surely comparing them to chinese policemen warrants some racism?

Happyhyper 21:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Insensitivity perhaps (these are geeks after all), but racism, no. It would be good to know the dates of the books being alluded to, they may simply predate "yellow = Chinese" becoming politically incorrect. Stan 01:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

From VfD

• Yellow Pig Day- Google's already indexed it, and various users of Wikipedia content have already copied it to their databases, but it was just created minutes ago. All reference on the net seem to be to our content, or to bloggish sites. - user:zanimum
  • Not a vote (yet) Hours ago, actually. It seems to be something of a private joke (see here). Can the author please step forward and explain? Bmills 13:24, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Only two google hits, and neither provides any clue as to what this is. Fuzheado 17:22, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Seems to be an Amherst College thing [1]. Hmm, but hcssim is Hampshire College Summer Studies in Mathematics (and note the yellow pig on the top of the page). I'd say merge somewhere and redirect. But I'm not sure where yet. Keep. List on cleanup. Anthony DiPierro 21:59, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • More here. You really only got two google hits? You didn't do a very good search. Anthony DiPierro 22:05, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • This was already deleted 21:41, Oct 30, 2003 Angela deleted "Yellow Pig Day" (listed on vfd for 5 days; all real votes to delete) Maximus Rex 22:04, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • The original was actually better. Apparently this is more popular than we thought. Anthony DiPierro 22:07, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
      • Or the originators are more persistent than some about reposting an in-joke. I vote to delete. Jwrosenzweig 22:11, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • I'm the more recent author. Sorry to cause trouble; didn't realize it had been here before; was browsing the deletion-policy-discussion page, saw the paragraph below, and [as YPD is a real verifiable day, and people really do throw parties on July 17 or, occasionally, travel across the country to celebrate it in Amherst] thought to add it. I would be happy for it to be a) merged with a page on yellow pigs [which, as a phenomenon, are apparently far more widespread than I should like to believe], and b) added to a list of "Days" as recommended by Maximus; is there such a list? +sj+ 03:01, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
  • (layout cleaned up by Jamesday, now italic instead of splitting the votes into several chunks) Day Pages: MrJones asked whether there should be a policy on whether pages about days (Pi Day, Yellow Pig Day etc) are allowed and whether there ought to be a separate wiki for them. Maximus Rex explained that such pages are kept if they concern real verifiable days, and felt a separate wiki for them may not be useful. He suggested merging them into one page.
  • Keep verifiable day pages like this. Jamesday 10:53, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • See also: Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion/deleted#Yellow Pig Day. Angela. 11:37, Feb 8, 2004 (UTC)
  • If you keep it, you might want to add it to List of commemorative days. Mark Richards 16:43, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, I celebrated this at U. Chicago almost thirty years ago, so it's got some history. Stan 08:10, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Recent Comments

• Redirected for now. If someone else wants to decide to delete it instead of redirect it, I would be happy with that Angela. 01:37, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Great. A solution no one recommended instead of what the majority voted for. Anthony DiPierro 01:54, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. --Wik 23:03, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

I take it Angela didn't see the part where I mentioned participating at Chicago, 28 years ago to be more precise, and there were no Hampshire College students involved. It was a math program, so there's a math connection at least. I might have some printed material mentioning it (no Google in the 1970s!), will dig up the dustiest of my papers... Stan 02:06, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Actually, no I didn't see that. Presumably that was part of what Wik was or Anthony was removing during their edit war over this at VfD. I saw this verson, which was the entire discussion on VfD at the time. Your comments are not there at all. Angela. 02:16, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)

Heh, I see, what a mess. Sometimes it would be handy to have append-only pages! Stan 04:48, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I'd recommend doing a little research and putting up a better, more encyclopedic page than either version we've seen so far; I'd support it & most others would too, I feel. —Morven 02:19, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I didn't see James' and Stan's votes when I decided to redirect the page. Now I've seen them, I've un-redirected it. Angela. 19:26, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)

After deletion by Wik

So not deleting or redirecting the page is kind of pointless if Wik is just going to blank it over and over. So can somebody protect it in a nonblanked state at least, or (better) ban Wik permanently this time? Stan 00:43, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

If Wik is going to engage in simple vandalism contrary to our due process decision to keep, we'll just have to stop Wik from doing so. It won't be the first time. Meanwhile, you might want to make sure that the votes for undeletion result reflects the recent vfd vote and your new information. Otherwise we're effectively rewarding Wik for misbehavior. Jamesday 22:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Is anyone going to discuss my point instead of just reverting? Reverting is bad, you know. --Wik 00:47, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)

Hi there. I didn't see this extended discussion. I think YPD is real, of course; I'm the most recent author. The former author (you can find a copy of the page from last year on a foreign site with an old w'pedia version) must have celebrated it recently; links were to YPD sites from ca. 2000, which I didn't even know about. Seeing Stan's comments here, from 25 years ago, convinces me we should put the page back up. I honestly don't know where the yellow-pig tradition comes from; it would be fun to trace it back a ways. I've certainly come across yellow pigs in the offices of mathematicians in their 60s at Princeton and UT; much too old to have been at the modern type of "summer camp". Let's undelete the page and improve it. +sj+ 23:36, 2004 Feb 21 (UTC)

Blanking doesn't make a lot of sense. If you consider it a candidate for speedy deletion, use wikipedia:deleted test. If you don't, use wikipedia:votes for deletion. Martin 01:07, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I thought wikipedia:deleted test is for test pages. Maybe that page should be moved to wikipedia:speedy deletions then. --Wik 01:10, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)

Of course, see wikipedia talk:deleted test. Martin 02:33, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Why not try making an actual point, Wik? Your complaint about people ignoring your point is your first addition to this talk page. That's why we have talk pages, ya know. Stan 01:44, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

My view is that this is a different article to the one initially deleted, and by a different author who does not appear to have created it for trolling purposes. Therefore, the earlier votes should be discounted, and as the majority of the current votes favour keeping it, it should be kept. Angela. 08:33, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)

Well, aside from the unlikelihood that two articles on such an obscure topic are created in such a short time frame by two independent authors, I don't see how it matters anyway. Was the original article deleted because it was "created for trolling purposes", or because it was badly written, or for any other reason that would not apply to the second article? Wasn't it rather the case that it was deleted because the topic as such was deemed unencyclopedic? And wouldn't that apply equally to any recreation of the article? --Wik 08:55, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)

"Unencyclopedic" is an empty term that is usually used to cover up lack of specific compelling reasons. It's also unreasonable to be bound forever by a long-ago vote; what if the editors at the time were not in possession of all the facts, or if things change? If Yellow Pig Day becomes a US national holiday, should the article still be deleted because it was once decided to be "unencyclopedic"? Stan 14:47, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It wasn't that long ago (3½ months), and I don't think any things have changed. --Wik 15:01, Feb 15, 2004 (UTC)

I don't really care enough to fight over this, but if people want it undeleted, I suggest they vote for that at Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion. Angela. 02:55, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

I agree with the view expressed by Angela. We now know more about this and our decision to keep this time did reflect that additional knowledge. Jamesday 22:38, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

What exactly do we now know more? Without Anthony, who votes keep on everything, it would be a 2/3 majority to delete anyway. --Wik 23:03, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

I've undeleted this. See Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion#Yellow Pig Day. Angela. 19:11, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

Etymology

Can anybody explain the name? Mikkalai 22:16, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Both yellow pigs and the number 17 have a long history of association with mathematics, and with slightly oddball characters. I don't know *why*, though. (17: largest # of children of any of the world's billionaires... # of trees visible through the window of Dosteovsky's cell while he was in prison...) yellow pigs, though not found in nature, are made all over the world; I'm not sure what the histories involved are. +sj+

Long history as in decades, or centuries? Do you have a pre-1960 cite for yellow pigs? Just curious. Anthony DiPierro 15:40, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

List of Links

Not all these are necessarily appropriate to go into the article, so I'm listing them here.

• http://www.southalabama.edu/mathstat/personal_pages/brick/research/rindex.html
• http://www.xanga.com/last.aspx?user=spivak
• http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/R/random-numbers.html
• http://jargon.mu.nu/Archives/001611.html
• http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography-digest@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu/msg05815.html
• http://developer.syndetic.org/query_jargon.pl?term=bible ("When one wishes to specify a large but random number of things, and the context is inappropriate for N, certain numbers are preferred by hacker tradition (that is, easily recognized as placeholders). These include the following: 17 Long described at MIT as `the least random number'; see also 23. This may be Discordian in origin, or it may be related to some in-jokes about 17 and "yellow pig" (http://www.vinc17.org/yp17_eng.html) propagated by the mathematician Michael Spivak.")

---

The places listed are plainly colleges, so surely it isn't wrong to say that it is celebrated at US colleges, Anthony? Everyking 20:41, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• As I said in my comment, Hampshire College Summer Studies in Mathematics is a high school program. While it isn't wrong to say "colleges", you'd have to add "and other places" to make it clear. Anthony DiPierro 20:46, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Surely the Hampshire College program is done on college ground, isn't it? The phrase could just as easily be interpreted to mean physical locations, and that's what it was intended to mean. Everyking 21:12, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • The program is primarily done on college ground with trips to other locations, but the external links make it clear that this is celebrated by some outside the confines of college campuses (most colleges are closed for the summer on YPD). Anthony DiPierro 03:30, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Besides college campuses, where is this celebrated, Anthony? Everyking 03:24, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

• Look at the external links. Anthony DiPierro 03:30, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Well then, I think you should contribute more of your extensive knowledge of Yellow Pig's Day to the article, because right now only colleges are listed. Everyking 03:32, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Actually I don't think colleges should be listed at all. YPD has very little to do with colleges, though it is the kind of amusement that is typically followed by a bunch of geeky college kids college crowd. Anthony DiPierro 03:36, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • When I celebrated it, it was in a U. Chicago program for high school students. A good general way might be to say "in academic contexts". The whole thing is evolving folk culture, a little impreciseness avoids datedness. Stan 05:05, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Anthony, why are 2002 and 2003 irrelevant to Yellow Pig's Day? They are useful for context -- just like 1960s and 1970s -- and the article does not appear to me to be a case of overwikification. Linking July 17 makes less sense than linking 2002; a July 17 link adds no significant historical context to the topic. Everyking 03:01, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context. Maximus Rex 03:03, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

My argument is that they are relevant, as I explained. (Do you think July 17 is but 2002 is not?) Besides, that is a guideline which I do not regard as well-founded. Everyking 03:07, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

July 17 is Yellow Pig's Day. It doesn't get any more relevant than that. 2002 and 2003, on the other hand, aren't really related to YPD at all. They just happen to be years that some Wikipedian reported celebrating YPD (a fact which is original research and probably shouldn't even be mentioned, but that's a different argument). You could just as well list every year YPD was celebrated, and link it. But I think it's obvious that would be stupid. Maybe you would disagree. anthony (this comment is a work in progress and may change without prior notice) 03:21, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I was not arguing that we should not have a July 17 link; I was arguing that a survey of other historical events of July 17 is not as relevant to the context of Yellow Pig's Day as a survey of other historical events of 2002 (or the 1960s, for that matter) is. Everyking 03:28, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Yellow Pig Day" is more correct than "Yellow Pig's Day"

How about having the redirection go the other way around? I'm pretty confident that "Yellow Pig Day" is the more correct term. Schoen 08:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I went to HCSSiM this year (David Kelly, one of the inventors of the Yellow Pig tradition, runs it), and it seems that Yellow Pigs' Day is preferred. I can confirm that (a) he's been celebrating for at least 33 years and that (b) it is currently celebrated at Hampshire on 7/17 because that's the only 17th of a month that is inside the HCSSiM schedule (it's a six-week summer program). qqwref 28 Aug 2005

The original date was 17 May

I first learned about Yellow Pig Day in 1972. Back then, it was celebrated on 17 May, that being the 17th day of the 17th month. I believe this should be considered the `correct' date. Cheers, Peter Doyle

Explaining the significance (hopefully)

The significance of Yellow Pig's Day/yellow pigs seems to me to be that it is:

• a cult-ish holiday/symbol for mathematicians and a way to raise math-awareness (compare with Pi day);
• a specific way for mathematicians to recognize each other as having worked with a particular lineage of mathematicians (not quite analogous to Erdős numbers, but in some ways similar);
• an interesting example of a successful meme in academia (much like the smiley or all your base in a more mainstream culture).

I haven't been able to determine where/when yellow pigs began, but I think Michael Spivak (author of several math books with reference to yellow pigs), David Kelly, and Don Goldberg were all associated with yellow pigs fairly early on. It's most frequently associated with the high school summer program HCSSiM. I'd guess yellow pigs have meaning to a few thousand people; that's not a large number when compared with the entire population, but it is notable when compared with math/science/CS areas/subcultures, where people who asssociate themselves with yellow pigs are likely to be found in a higher density.

I'll try to work on a substantial rewrite of this page in the next week.

(Disclaimer: While I'm trying to be NPOV, I do in fact celebrate Yellow Pig's Day.)

--Gruepig 18:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Non-data report

I was sure I had a mimeographed page describing Yellow Pig Day [sic] for 7/17/76 among the papers from my summer at Chicago, but I've thumbed through them, and couldn't find it. Every problem set, and a group photo (oh the nostalgia), but not the one thing that was actually of interest 30 years later... Stan 01:56, 28 January 2006 (UTC)