Notifications
Sign Up Sign In
Meta

Rationale for rejecting suggested edits is very confusing

+2
−0

Two months ago @aCVn asked:

Do we want to keep the [science-based] and [reality-check] tags?.

A month ago the same user asked:

Are there tags we should remove from all questions?.

In a Comment under the more recent Q @HDE226868 wrote there aren't really many other tags (particularly meta tags) like science-based that are clearly redundant. I agree and note no others have been suggested for removal, so far. That's not to say there aren't others that should be removed and if so, clearly the sooner the better.

[science-based] and [reality-check] have been addressed. In answers from two months ago to the earlier Q @MonicaCellio wrote: [science-based] is implied by this site's scope and doesn't add anything and I suspect what I just said applies to [reality-check] too and @HDE226868 wrote: [science-based] almost certainly should be removed and I think we could make a similar argument for [reality-check]. These are the only two As so far to that Q, neither has any down votes at present and they are sharing 5 up votes.

Neither of [science-based] and [reality-check] tags has been removed automatically yet, nor do there seem to be any plans to do so, but the possibility has certainly been raised.

So, I suggested an edit to the more recent Q:

i) to insert ", other than [science-based] and [reality-check]," into the Title

ii) to remove "Are there tags that should be removed globally from the site? Is science-based one of them?" from the body.

The response was:

Rejected.

This suggested edit was rejected 14 days ago by HDE 226868:

Reality-check hasn't been discussed or agreed upon as a possibility for removal - an answer proposing it might be helpful.

I appreciate the provision of some explanation and that space for that is limited, but would nevertheless be grateful for clarification. Regarding "Reality-check hasn't been discussed" – what about https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/questions/275792), and @HDE226868's own comment "I think we could make a similar argument for [reality-check]"? If the As to https://scientific-speculation.codidact.com/questions/275792 do not count as "an answer proposing it" then what exactly is required – and in which thread?

Why should this post be closed?

0 comments

1 answer

+0
−0

Apologies for taking a while to respond to this. When I used the phrase "hasn't been discussed", I was talking about the meta discussion at hand, rather than prior discussions. I rejected the edit, then, for three reasons:

  • aCVn hadn't explicitly stated that they supported removing the reality-check tag, and adding it to the question is essentially putting words into their mouth.
  • I think it would be helpful for each tag proposed for removal to have its own answer under the newer discussion giving a rationale for removal. I'm also not sure that the suggested edit did so.
  • My previous answer that called for the removal of reality-check only got two upvotes, which . . . probably doesn't count as community consensus. Granted, the site was even smaller then, but that doesn't mean that the community agrees, and I'd be loathe to claim that it does without further discussion.

I think that's what I'd been trying to say when I rejected the edit.

2 comments

No rush. Sorry, but even less clear now. But not a problem, I'll stick to sites that do make sense to me. ‭pnuts‭ about 2 months ago

@pnuts Let me know what's still confusing or unclear, and I'll be happy to clarify. ‭HDE 226868‭ about 2 months ago

Sign up to answer this question »

This site is part of the Codidact network. We have other sites too — take a look!

You can also join us in chat!

Want to advertise this site? Use our templates!