This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Technology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology Robotics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics 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.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Computing This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Artificial Intelligence This article is within the scope of WikiProject Artificial Intelligence, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Artificial intelligence 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.Artificial IntelligenceWikipedia:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceTemplate:WikiProject Artificial IntelligenceArtificial Intelligence

• ... that vibe coding can allow non-coders to write software to solve problems in their lives?

• ALT1: ... that journalist Kevin Roose used vibe coding to create an app to suggest what to pack for lunch based on what he has in his fridge? Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/27/technology/personaltech/vibecoding-ai-software-programming.html
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Olympic Airways Flight 3838

paul2520 💬 16:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Overall: The article is new enough and long enough. Source verifies hook. No copyvio detected. Both hooks are interesting and cited. QPQ done. Should probably cleanup the tag on the article first though. Otherwise, both hooks are good to go. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 23:05, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Resolved. Thanks so much, WikiOriginal-9! = paul2520 💬 04:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, saying anything positive about something AI-related necessarily implies a level of investment in the perception of AI that automatically kills one's ability to satisfy WP:NPOV, and it does it so thoroughly that it makes assertions like "The practice defies the belief in the software industry that software engineering demands great skill" seem neutral.

Second, this article depends *heavily* on a source that consists of a non-programmer—a non-expert—gawping at what he openly compares to magic—"Vibe coding 'can feel like sorcery'."

Third, who *cares* what some random tweet says? The bare fact of its inclusion suggests that the person who added it is scrounging for things to say in defense of a position—out of step with neutrality—and casts doubts on whether it satisfies WP:NOTE.

All in all, this article feels like someone trying to peddle AI to non-technical people using the façade of Wikipedia for credibility. "Look, you can use AI to make things just happen!" It gives the barest attempt at making itself seem neutral, but it fails because it has to try.

Anyway, I think this article should be deleted.

Arkadios 200 (talk) 17:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whether this specific buzzword will survive more than a few weeks remains to be seen, and I'd agree it seems a little early to have its own article. Perhaps the most significant information in this article could be distilled into an additional paragraph under Generative artificial intelligence#Code for now. If this concept proves to be notable in the long run then it could perhaps become part of a broader article analogous to Music and artificial intelligence, where it could be presented together with other encyclopedic information on the overall use of generative AI in software engineering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.93.93 (talk) 01:03, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it does survive, and even if it did still somehow deserve its own article, I don't think this should be its final title. "AI-dependent software engineering" or some such, with a note in the lead that it's colloquially known as "vibe coding".

Arkadios 200 (talk) 03:03, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe more specific, like "LLM-dependent software engineering or "LLM-dependent development"? One thing I've noticed is that a lot of the cited sources reference the original Andrej Karpathy tweet, which makes me wonder if there's an issue there.Autarch (talk) 08:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would count as falling short of WP:MADEUP. Arkadios 200 (talk) 09:12, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roose is ... heavily non technical and has a track record of credulity. I recall his promotion of cryptocurrency in the NYT in 2022 just a few months before it crashed. NYT coverage is an evidence point toward notability, but there are significant reasons to doubt a Roose article as a good source for technical claims - David Gerard (talk) 09:32, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would only count toward notability by how much some guy's tweet deserves an article in NYT in the first place. If NYT wrote an article about my socks, that wouldn't be a reason to create an article about them here. Arkadios 200 (talk) 09:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]