This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
Is this really an encyclopedic subject or just a passing fad? I don’t have a strong opinion either way, I'm just a little surprised by the rapid appearance of this article.
JezGrove (
talk)
22:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)reply
The dress which is very similar got an article pretty fast too. this fad has a lot of media attention too so I think that makes it relevant enough to stay.
-glove- (
talk)
22:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)reply
If this is where votes are being cast for delete vs. keep, I vote keep. Like
The dress this meme has been very widespread, and it's good to have an encyclopedic entry for it here on WP.
Girona7 (
talk)
14:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)reply
I also vote to keep the article; other short-lived, popular crazes such as
Dancing mania are allowed their own articles. If millions of people are affected by a passing fad, does that not give it relevance? Or is it just long-lasting historical significance that determines relevance?
jamgoodman (
talk)
15:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)reply
I am informed by an acquaintance that they hear 'laurel' from the
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/laurel original, whereas they hear 'yanny' from the ogg file presently linked by article, namely:
File:YannyLaurel.ogg
I don't see much if any information about the provenance of the ogg file. Certainly the files shouldn't be assumed to be equivalent, and the ogg file should be removed, or the article ought to have some remark about this issue.
CountMacula (
talk)
03:05, 19 May 2018 (UTC)reply
@
Yoshiman6464: I believe the main goal of Wikipedia is to inform, not to enhance any illusion. Please edit the article to clearly reflect that the linked file is not the original file.
CountMacula (
talk)
14:20, 19 May 2018 (UTC)reply
The original was recorded in 2007 with professional gear and a trained operatic voice, so sounds like what Jones said. The 2009 Szabo bootleg was ripped from computer speakers through library silence into a consumer-grade mic an unknown distance away, and there captured the ghost of "Yanny" that Feldman turned into a 2018 global phenomenon. If you're hearing the phantom word in the unenchanted and non-notable cut, you're either exceptionally tuned for it or your recent expectations tell your brain to hear again what it heard repeated on Twitter before. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.60.228.70 (
talk)
23:30, 31 May 2018 (UTC)reply