Talk:Yes-no pen

Isn't this more suited to a dictionary? We seem to have written one article about four entirely seperate sorts of pens: at a minimum, we should have some disambiguation going on. Martin 18:57, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Four different dictionary definitions still does not suit it to be an article. No disambiguation is appropriate for something that is both a dicdef and has no created articles to disambiguate. - Texture 19:11, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

With respect to your first sentence, isn't that what I just said? With respect to your second, I simply disagree, though I expect my disagreement might be more compelling if I showed you. Martin 19:22, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yes, that is what you said. I agreed. I see your diambiguation page and still feel it warrants deletion. - Texture 19:35, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I see. When you said "still", I thought you were expressing disagreement, my apologies. Martin 19:36, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

From VfD

• Yes-no pen - another obscure Boyerism. --Wik 17:45, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)
  • Again with the Boyerism. If I had really invented all the stuff Wik et al. think I did I would be the most brilliant genius in history. --Daniel C. Boyer 18:34, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails Google test totally. (btw, are there any geniuses that are not brilliant?) Maroux 20:43, 2004 Feb 29 (UTC)
    • All geniuses are brilliant, but some are more brilliant than others. BTW, I vote keep. Meelar 22:15, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Everyking 20:58, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's not obscure at all. Darkcore 04:47, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Boyer's refusal to comply with Wikipedia rules is moving his behaviour towards trollish. Everytime I've spent several hours doing background research into his articles of this sort I've come up with nothing to back him up, it's just not worth my time anymore. --Imran 23:25, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • What rules have I refused to comply with? --Daniel C. Boyer 18:39, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete - How many makes of "yes-no-pens" (with that name) are there? Is this a one shot toy that was never produced again? How do coins qualify as a "yes-no-pen"? (That alone decides it for me.) - Texture 15:45, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • I don't know how many makes of "yes-no" pens there are, but you will find these (accompanying the special books they are designed to be used with) in almost any hospital gift-shop, discount store, large grocery store, &c. They are very far from being uncommon. Plus, if you'll carefully read the article, you will see that it in no way describes coins as being "yes-no" pens. --Daniel C. Boyer 18:39, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
      • If you read the article carefully and you will find "Another classical "yes-no" fortune telling method is the use of coins. " My point being that the article is whimsy. - Texture 18:46, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • The bit about coins was added by another editor fairly recently. Daniel C. Boyer is not the author... -- Cyan 19:00, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
      • I was never talking about whatever portion he wrote. I am talking about the article at the time it was nominated for deletion - Texture 02:17, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. I can vouch for the existence and prevalence of the item in question; yes-no game books were how my parents kept me happy on long car trips when I was a kid. -- Cyan 19:00, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:13, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, now a valid disambiguation page (though maybe a redirect would work too). Like Cyan, I used one of these as a kid. Seemed a popular class of educational toy. Martin 19:39, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
    • Grew up on a farm, never had one. Had coins, though! Still vote to delete - Texture 19:53, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
  • No vote. I remember the "Yes and Know" books. Is that what is really meant here? Josh Cherry 02:51, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Further discussion

[Reply to Josh Cherry]: The "yes and know" pens accompany the "Yes and Know" books. --Daniel C. Boyer 16:13, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I just heard a feature on National Public Radio which claimed that there was a connection to a voter verification method, Scantegrity: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112558776 This is all that I know about it, but it suggests (if it is at all true) that connections should be made between this article and the one for Scantegrity. TomS TDotO (talk) 18:45, 6 September 2009 (UTC)