Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 153 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

There seems to be a glut of low-quality tag wiki edit suggestions coming from low rep users. So many from the same user, that I'm not allowed to vote on them all. Right now Mark Hurd is a big offender.

Can this be changed so that suggesting an edit to a tag wiki requires some rep in that tag, albeit less than is needed for a direct edit?

Maybe 15% as many upvotes should be required to suggest an edit as for a self-approved edit.

share|improve this question
@Pekka: Maybe a rate limit would be better. It would encourage users to spend some time and actually read the wikipedia articles they're excerpting and/or some of the questions in the tag, and understand the tag they're writing a wiki for. Because really, suggesting a tag wiki for "inheritance" that doesn't mention polymorphism (and excludes the classic VB implementation of inheritance) isn't all that useful. – Ben Voigt Feb 6 '11 at 15:16
Considering how many tags have no wiki at all I don't like additional barriers to tag-wikis. Giving a one sentence definition doesn't require much knowledge of the topic. – CodesInChaos Feb 7 '11 at 12:08
BTW My "glut" has finished. I thought a starting simple description with a link to a Wikipedia article was a good first step -- definitely better than nothing. The suggested editing feature is probably missing the feedback that Wikipedia provides by editing the user's talk page. – Mark Hurd Feb 7 '11 at 15:49
@Mark: We appreciate you taking the time to write tag wikis, but please take the time to read 5-6 questions from the tag, and more than a cursory look at the Wikipedia article. But you were submitted 3 or more new tag wikis in less than 60 seconds. At 20 seconds per tag, the best case is that someone is going to have to come in and rewrite it, which is no change from how you found it, and quite possibly you'll summarize completely the wrong topic or on a subset of the topic as discussed on SO, which may lead to mistagging of future questions. – Ben Voigt Feb 7 '11 at 16:13
@Mark: Also, the wikipedia content license requires you to attribute any content you lift from the site. A link is part of that, but my understanding is that you also need to say that the content came from there, a link by itself is not enough. – Ben Voigt Feb 7 '11 at 16:16
@Ben I may have submitted a couple of edits at the same time, but I did review the first page of questions for all tags I submitted tag wikis. When I directly quoted the Wikipedia article I mentioned it. When I used my own words I didn't. – Mark Hurd Feb 7 '11 at 16:24
BTW I assume I only get rep for accepted edits. In that case I produced 26 accepted tag wikis on SO and 19 on Meta. Note also that the date in the activity is when they're accepted, not when I suggested the edit. – Mark Hurd Feb 7 '11 at 16:33
@Ben I am actually quite offended your are calling the edits @Mark submitted "glut", he has a very high hit rate, more than 80% of his edits get approved by no less than to 10k users. He is using the system as designed and helping out. This only serves to discourage him. – waffles Feb 9 '11 at 21:06
Please don't describe someone who is giving a lot of their free time as an 'offender'. It takes time to propose such edits, and yes it takes time to critique them. How is the system not working? – Tim Post Feb 9 '11 at 21:23
@Tim: If that were so, there'd be no problem. But we're talking 3+ new tag wikis in under a minute. That's broken. I think we want the system to encourage a user who has 20 minutes to donate to do a good job on 3-4 tags instead of a thoughtless job on 50 tags. @waffles: There are 10k users who approve everything that comes across the suggested edits page regardless of whether the approver understands the material and possibly without reading it. Are there statistics for "time between viewing the suggested edit page and hitting approve"? – Ben Voigt Feb 9 '11 at 21:31
@Ben ... these same users can just edit the site willy-nilly and wreak havoc, I agree I have seen some users that approve stuff too fast. However, writing tag wiki excerpts is not something that takes 20 minutes, the body sure ... but the short excerpt which is critical only takes a minute or so – waffles Feb 9 '11 at 21:37
@Ben - We're talking about wikis that did not exist that someone took some time to create. I'm sorry, but a wrong wiki invites the creation of something correct much more than the absence of one, as illustrated by this question. Again, I ask you, how is the system not working? :) – Tim Post Feb 9 '11 at 21:47
@waffles: If you do the math on my comment, I was saying about 5-6 minutes per tag, for both the excerpt and a first draft of the wiki body. IMO 20-30 second is much too short. @Tim: I apparently have a different idea of "took some time to create". I don't think typing the term into wikipedia and cutting and pasting the first sentence qualifies as "taking time" or "creation". – Ben Voigt Feb 9 '11 at 21:59
@waffles: What I didn't mention is that only about 15% were reasonably good wikis. The other half I don't have the expertise to judge (most of the wikis being added are pretty obscure). If I can spot 2 low quality ones for every good one, yeah I think there's a problem. I would further venture to guess that 99% of wiki summaries written in under 60 seconds are low quality, some rate limiting wouldn't hurt. If you think that badly written wikis get more attention from the domain experts than empty ones, why not auto-fill empty wikis with "tag is crap. Use random-other-tag instead."? – Ben Voigt Feb 10 '11 at 0:18
@BenVoigt: Ooh, I like that idea for attracting edits! – SamB Feb 2 '12 at 4:44

We already rate limit suggested edits, if you submit a large number of poor suggested edits you will be automatically banned from suggesting edits for a period of time.

The correct thing to do here is reject the poor suggested edits, then we can automatically ban as required. If noise persists we can escalate the ban.

Also, I am actually quite offended your are calling the edits Mark submitted "glut", he has a very high hit rate, more than 80% of his edits get approved by no less than two 10k users. He is using the system as designed and helping out. This only serves to discourage him.

I am not re-introducing the complexity around suggesting tag-wikis, people never got it, it just caused confusion and too many tag wikis were left blank. We are seeing a maintainable and auditable list of wiki changes. Looking through what happened today all looks fine to me.

share|improve this answer

I don't think encouraging people not to help is the right answer. The right answer is:
Don't show suggested edits that I can't approve

And yes, I too am annoyed by the glut of Mark Hurd's edits; but only because I can't do anything with them, not because I think he shouldn't be trying to add information where none exists.

share|improve this answer
Well, the existence of a suggested edit seems to be preventing me from accessing the direct edit function and putting in a more comprehensive description. – Ben Voigt Feb 6 '11 at 14:56
That is unfortunate. Wait, you're a 20k+...can't you go through and approve/reject them all, per @waffles's answer? – Phrogz Feb 6 '11 at 14:59
There's a limit of three approve/reject to a specific user per day. That's why @BenVoigt can't approve/reject them all. See Pekka's request to increase the limit about that. – Borror0 Feb 6 '11 at 15:02
@Phrogz: Well, I found a workaround: By visiting the tag wiki edit history first, I can reach the edit page. – Ben Voigt Feb 6 '11 at 15:04
@Phrogz ... the like you posted is status-completed – waffles Feb 9 '11 at 21:41
@waffles w00t, thanks :) Does this also cover not showing flagged comments that I can't do anything about? – Phrogz Feb 9 '11 at 22:00
@Phrogz ... this is unrelated to flagging – waffles Feb 9 '11 at 23:15

You must log in to answer this question.

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