That sounds a bit unfortunate for me because I would like to create a tag without it, and start retagging questions related to that... I have no question right now which would belong to that tag though.
Can someone please create the tag foo on Stack Overflow? We need to have it because
Foo is a recent/upcoming release of a popular, established OS/language/framework
Foo is a hot new language/library
we're currently using some other tag for questions about Foo, but it's causing ambiguity with a ...
Right. But editing posts, for users below 2000 rep, is still a (relatively) new feature. I think there might be some logic in there that discards submissions where nothing in the body was changed. That's not based on any knowledge of the code, just a vague memory of someone mentioning the bug in the past... I'll try to bring it up tomorrow when someone's awake.
That said, there are a few spelling and grammar errors in the existing post; could you try fixing those (or making some kind of body change) and letting me know if that works?
Could someone please remove all the comments for the initial question? stackoverflow.com/questions/18462420/… After the discussion, they are just noise, and the problem is already solved, and I made the author aware.
I just reached 1500 rep last night on Stack Overflow, and I thought it would be nice to create a tag for our project "QtSerialPort".
Having read the text on the url below, I am about to go to the corresponding existing questions, to add yet another tag to them.
http://lists.qt-project.org/piper...
I guess @Oded can confirm that the process I've described is the one to take. There are several users in the community keeping an eye on newly created tags. I'd say there is nothing to worry about. Worst case we appropriately retag it, should it end up being used.
Not looking at code right now, but I believe since the rep level is low enough, the edit went into the suggest edits queue. Which makes the post ineligible for review.
@LaszloPapp That's overly "paranoid". If someone retags, you remove the tag. So it takes one more day.
What's illogical to you may not be illogical to others. And there is a history to things and reasons for things being done a certain way that you may not be aware of.
Tags get created and removed and questions are retagged all the times. Having someone look at tags reaching 0 tagged questions and then deleting them makes no sense to me.
Also, consider that we have a very large database - deleting "orphan" tags in one go makes more sense than one at a time (in terms of impact on the DB)
Well, you are saying there is a tag that isn't making sense. I say - ok. Do something about it and remove it from all questions tagged with it. So it will get deleted.
We have chat for this kind of thing. You can always get some people together to discuss tags. It actually happens here on occasion - when mass retags are needed.
Frankly, it feels like you are making a mountain of a molehill. Tags are easy enough to create and delete that it really doesn't matter. Just retag and fix it.
And if it's really a tag that is so problematic that a discussion is needed, take it to Meta. Then we have a clear history. See all the discussions on tag removal we already have on there.
Can you stop your hyperbole? A user tried to help you out and created a wrongly hyphenated tag. It is on no question atm and will be gone within 12 hours from now.
@LaszloPapp And what if people disagree with you? What if there are people who actually see value in the tag and do want to use it?
Your whole argument at the moment is - "the tag is crazy and should be removed, because I don't like it". And you also don't like the way the system currently works.
@LaszloPapp That's not what I said. Let me be very clear. If the tag is something you believe is not good, go ahead and remove it from all questions. It will get deleted, after a day. What I am not agreeing with is your sense of immediacy - that "the tag needs to go now".
And I might add to Oded's remarks that if there is a significant number of questions with that tag, please take it to Meta first to discuss the validity of the tag.
Well, for someone who shows every sign of impatience, where you have been told the process, you seem happy to discuss it here (where nothing will be done) for hours, instead of using the proper channel.
@Oded: do not jump on new comers with full of invalid concerns in their opinion, so that you do not demotivate that, etc... and then you will not reply to you, but go to the forum.
All we are saying is that we have been around for a while, we know the community and the history of certain features and how the community reacts to certain feature requests. We are trying to give you some of the knowledge. You are most welcome to ignore this.
@LaszloPapp Yes. You don't live in a vacuum. Things you want are things others may not want. So, to get things done you need to discuss and come to an agreement first.
@Oded: my problem was rather the demotivating style, and "because you are a newcomer, you should just read the history and agree with that, no matter what".
Under the newest tags section of Stackoverflow, I found the tags elipse and javascrpt which are likely to have been created as a result of a typo. Is there a way to suggest removal of such tags? If so, where? And how much rep is required for that privilege? I don't think suggesting a synonym woul...
"All we are saying is that we have been around for a while, we know the community and the history of certain features and how the community reacts to certain feature requests. We are trying to give you some of the knowledge. You are most welcome to ignore this."
I rarely find users who are so unwilling to listen to the motivations of those who actually implement the damn system as to why their requests might not be necessary, nor a good idea.
I attempted to ask a question regarding "object-role-modeling" (it's a design methodology that doesn't get nearly enough attention as it should).
Unfortunately, when I wrote the question, I made a spelling error and assigned it to a non-existent tag "object-role-modelling". I realised my mistake...