What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

I was just wondering about how many people blindly perform reviews. Personally, I have noticed that once in a while, I will accept a suggested edit if it looks good and has no spelling or grammar mistakes without actually confirming the content if I cannot (e.g., if I am using XP at the moment instead of 7), but I usually do read it to make sure it is at least relevant.

Today I rejected a tag-wiki suggestion because only two questions are using the tag, both of which are at least three years old. It has already been established (by Jeff himself no less) that tags with very low use have little reason to exist beyond a few months (i.e., once the questions have gone stale and are unlikely to be answered anytime soon or to benefit from having a tag). As a simple solution, he has even created a script to automatically remove single-use tags more than six months old.

I explained in my rejection comment (along with a link to the aforementioned thread) that the tag in question falls into this category and should just be deleted due to lack of use rather than have a tag-wiki filled out for it. And yet, two people (one a mod) subsequently approved the tag-wiki suggestion. I can’t help but wonder if they simply looked at the suggested text, thought it was acceptable (i.e., not spam/vandalism), and merely clicked approve automatically out of habit.

I checked to see if perhaps SuperUser has a different tag policy from StackOverflow, but it doesn’t seem to.

Is blind-reviewing a real problem? I know there is a review log, but is there a way to actually address reviews that seem incorrect, particularly for tags since they don’t have Flag links like questions/answers?

share|improve this question
    
@MartijnPieters thanks for the suggestion and link (bloody search is still quite poor on SO). Maybe I should edit the question to be specific to tag-wikis… –  Synetech Dec 25 '12 at 23:22
    
Feel free to consolidate your comments into an answer. ☺ (Maybe I should edit the question to be specific to tag-wikis…) –  Synetech Dec 25 '12 at 23:22
2  
It would never even occur to me to bother checking how many times a tag has been used before approving a tag wiki. –  Martin Smith Dec 25 '12 at 23:25
    
As for the search: help is on the way. –  Martijn Pieters Dec 25 '12 at 23:25
    
It would never even occur to me to bother checking how many times a tag has been used before approving a tag wiki. I guess its the OCD in me; I can’t stand the idea of avoidable clutter. ☺ –  Synetech Dec 25 '12 at 23:27
    
@Synetech: Perhaps you should, because it's otherwise a dupe of half-a-dozen others here. –  Martijn Pieters Dec 25 '12 at 23:27
    
I think the rep required for reviewing needs to be raised. And I have seen some cases where "Community" itself approves/rejects some posts where it needs a proper review. –  iDev Dec 26 '12 at 0:30
    
I think the rep required for reviewing needs to be raised. I’m not sure that would help. In the case above, one of the approvals came from a mod. –  Synetech Dec 26 '12 at 0:50
    
@Synetech, Well that doesn't look good then. But my suggestion was mainly to avoid people without enough experience in SO trying to review the posts. They need to spend some quality time here to understand the whole mechanism before they do something like this. –  iDev Dec 26 '12 at 1:53

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

The tag wiki edits should be seen separately from the tag use itself; the edits themselves were just fine and acceptable. Just go and edit those two questions and remove the tag, the tag wiki itself will be deleted automatically then.

That said, robo reviewers are a real problem and you'll find plenty of posts here on Meta on that subject already:

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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