2

Presently there is a flurry of edits, rollbacks, re-edits etc. mostly focussed on tags. Apparently some user seems to think that there are too many of them, or that they are redundant, or something else. I can't say precisely what, since they just delete tags, rather than discussing the matter here.

Might the tag deleter(s?) clarify their intentions? Or might the moderators clarify that tags are fine as they are and, if necessary, protect the questions involved in the changes? Of course any other opinion is welcome!

1
  • Removing tags is not forbidden; removing tags that do not apply to the question is not forbidden either. It is more "dangerous" reverting the edit without picking up the tags that effectively should be used from a question. (And no, removing a tag from a question is not deleting the tag.)
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 15:41

2 Answers 2

2

I fully agree that acting on tags in several posts should first require some discussion here in Meta, particularly if the removal or addition of tags is controversial among users, which is indeed what happened.

The purpose of tags, in my opinion, is not to rigidly classify a question, but to help in searches. It's very possible that some tags overlap, but this is not a reason for removing them from posts, unless they're actually identical: in this case users can propose merging, rather than remove altogether what they think are duplicates.

Controversies are not solved by fighting, but by discussing them.

11
  • Notice that cooking was removed from four-five questions. That is not "several posts."
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 15:46
  • 1
    @apaderno I wasn't referring just to cooking, but considering the amount of traffic on this side, that's several anyway.
    – egreg Mod
    Mar 15 at 17:15
  • The traffic on the site does not make five edited questions several posts. If they were several posts, they should be several posts even for the person suggesting the edits, considering that he picked up questions that were not asked in the past seven days.
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 17:22
  • As I already said, it is not that who adds tags is always correct, and who remove tags is always wrong.
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 17:22
  • 3
    @apaderno As I have already said, this requires discussion as soon as it appears controversial.
    – egreg Mod
    Mar 15 at 17:32
  • It was controversial since the moment suggested edits started to add a tag used from four or five questions to questions that were not asked in the past seven days, not from the moment I removed the added tag.
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 18:50
  • Yet, no question has been asked on the meta site when the suggested edits started.
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 18:51
  • 1
    @apaderno You seem to ignore the fact that your edits started the controversy.
    – egreg Mod
    Mar 15 at 20:23
  • 1
    @apaderno Four to five is several. Mar 15 at 21:49
  • @egrep You meant the fact I rejected the suggested edits. And no, the controversy involves also the person who reverted the edit I have done when I clicked on reject and edit in the suggested edits queue, which is also the last person who made the edit to those questions.
    – apaderno
    Mar 16 at 6:39
  • @ElementsInSpace It's a quite subjective definition, given that several means less than many.
    – apaderno
    Mar 16 at 6:41
1

To be specific, I like the tag. It’s a good tag because there are lots of words/phrases that are only used in this context, and food related terms often don’t translate precisely between languages.

There are only 8 questions with this tag so far, but this enough to justify its existence. I can imagine dozens of perfectly reasonable questions for this site that would go under this tag.

If this tag didn’t exist already, I probably would have suggested a tag for “food” rather than “cooking”, but choosing to call it “cooking” is actually better because it has a wider scope.


To be general, if someone doesn’t like a particular established tag then they should bring up discussion here on meta to seek consensus before going through and removing it (or rejecting suggested edits that add it).

8
  • cooking is not an established tag. It was a tag used by very few questions that you started to add to questions that did not use it, which were not even asked in the past seven days.
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 15:44
  • Then, it should also be better to ask a question on meta about the more appropriate tags to use before going down to add tags to questions that are not even recent. As for adding a tag that does not exist, with a reputation of 139, you cannot yet create tags.
    – apaderno
    Mar 15 at 18:57
  • 2
    @apaderno: I don't understand why a tag with few questions should be a problem. In Literature.SE, for instance, you will find lots of tags with very few questions. To see an example, have a look to the tag "annie-ernaux" in Literature.SE.
    – Charo Mod
    Mar 15 at 20:15
  • 2
    @apaderno I still don’t understand your objection. It seems like you are saying that the [cooking] tag doesn’t have enough questions. But then you go and try to block me from adding it to others. This is a contrary. Please explain your position in an answer. Mar 15 at 21:55
  • 2
    @apaderno Perhaps you can also explain why you rejected my suggestion to add the [abbreviations] tag to your question that is about abbreviations. Mar 15 at 22:08
  • @Charo Tags are not thought to be used in few questions. That is why they are automatically deleted when a tag is used from a single question (or maybe two questions).
    – apaderno
    Mar 16 at 6:33
  • My objection is to your description of the tag, which you describe as established tag when it is not. Obviously, you do not even comment on the fact you added the tag to questions that were not asked in the past days.
    – apaderno
    Mar 16 at 6:33
  • First ask to egrep why he rejected your suggested edit to add a tag to a different question.
    – apaderno
    Mar 16 at 6:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .