Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I'd think it would be a silver badge. Receive a net 100 upvotes on your answers to questions flagged as Community Wiki.

share|improve this question

You can already receive many of the current badges for CW answers (Nice Answer, Good Answer, Great Answer, etc.). Why do you need another one?

share|improve this answer
Good point. However, some users lose sight of this. Specifically encouraging users to participate in community wiki questions benefits the community as a whole. – Bob Kaufman Mar 9 '10 at 16:35
@Bob: I don't see how getting people to participate in CW questions is beneficial, or needed for that matter. Many questions marked as CW were made that way because they are very subjective and open-ended (i.e. they are designed more for fun, discussion, taking opinion polls, etc.). These sorts of questions already get huge numbers of contributions and attention. – gnostradamus Mar 9 '10 at 16:40

So if you provide a mediocre CW answer, and I edit it and improve it slightly, and someone else adds some stuff, and then I come back and fix the formatting, and then another guy shows up and corrects all the factual errors, and folks up-vote this now-great answer...

...then you should get another badge? How does this encourage the rest of us to participate...?

For a concrete example of what gnovice is getting at, take a look at my Super User profile... 6 silver badges for CW answers that are not only effectively worthless, but which I didn't even write. This "Philanthropist" idea would grant me yet another badge for doing nothing.

share|improve this answer
But that's what happens with existing badges like "good answer"/"great answer"/etc, right? – b.roth Mar 9 '10 at 16:44
...which brings us back to gnovice's question: "Why do you need another one"? IMHO, folks who participate in CW answers now are doing so because they care about the subject; adding more gee-gaws does nothing useful for this. – Shog9 Mar 9 '10 at 16:50

I disagree. People already get "good answer"/"great answer"/etc badges in CW posts. It would be one more badge for essentially the same thing.

share|improve this answer


Most of the crap appears under CW (seemingly due to a mistaken impression that makes it OK), and it is possible that most of the CW material is crap (though I wouldn't swear to that).

We certainly don't need another reason for people to post more of it.

And you can't have any pudding if you don eat your meat.

And stay off my lawn.

share|improve this answer
I remember when we had to trudge uphill and barefoot a mile through the snow to get answers to our programming questions! – gnostradamus Mar 9 '10 at 17:38
@gnovice: You forgot to mention that we had to find the answers in books read by candlelight at the library which was uphill both ways and only open on Tuesdays. ::someone just old enough to have done research before the internet took over:: – dmckee Mar 9 '10 at 18:33

You must log in to answer this question.

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