: 200 323 questions

I'd argue it's not really an informative tag.

closed as off-topic by Aza, Hugo Dozois, Monica Cellio, Aziz Shaikh, Martijn Pieters May 12 '14 at 6:44

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question pertains only to a specific site in the Stack Exchange Network. Questions on Meta Stack Exchange should pertain to our network or software that drives it as a whole, within the guidelines defined in the help center. You should ask this question on the meta site where your concern originated." – Aza, Hugo Dozois, Monica Cellio, Aziz Shaikh, Martijn Pieters
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 3
    The tag description is absolutely fitting for the tag, given that it is, ummm, missing ;) – Gordon Nov 22 '11 at 17:29
  • 1
    @Gordon The tag description could point to a 404 page. I'd be okay with that. – MPelletier Nov 22 '11 at 17:35
  • 1
    -1 (sorry) because I think it's quite descriptive when used appropriately. – Mr.Wizard Nov 24 '11 at 11:07
  • 3
    @Mr.Wizard Other banned tags are also descriptive. Problem, error, etc. I'm sure when used appropriately they were quite descriptive. Yet they are banned because they don't actually add substance and are too general to make search useful. – MPelletier Nov 24 '11 at 12:43
  • @MPelletier I see your point if the tag is used by itself. Perhaps [missing-x] tags would be better? – Mr.Wizard Nov 24 '11 at 12:48
  • 2
    @Mr.Wizard I don't mean to be obstinate, but I see tags as either categories or domains of expertise. I don't see missing or specification thereof as viable. – MPelletier Nov 24 '11 at 13:02
  • But thank you for the suggestion. It made me think that perhaps some questions in the missing tag are for other sites. Missing files, for example, would tend to be something with installation, so for SuperUser. – MPelletier Nov 24 '11 at 13:04
  • Please be obstinate if you wish; I would defend my own position. :-) I admit I don't have any really concrete examples, but I could see e.g. "[database] [missing-data]" as being important. – Mr.Wizard Nov 24 '11 at 13:04
  • Good point regarding SuperUser. As I was struggling to think of an example, missing-files came to mind first, but I thought just as you did, that is not likely programming related. It could be helpful to keep such a tag in the system just to find those posts. – Mr.Wizard Nov 24 '11 at 13:06
  • 2
    @Mr.Wizard whenever it's descriptive, it could be put in a question title to serve its purpose. I mean... who's going to look for questions regarding [missing] things? Concrete examples, maybe, [java][filenotfoundexception], but not [missing] in general. – toniedzwiedz Aug 25 '12 at 9:42
  • 2
    @Tom et al, I have gained more experience with tags as a Mathematica.SE pro-tem moderator since I wrote these comments. I now agree that [missing] is not a helpful tag and that descriptive titles would serve the purpose better than any seemingly valid use of the tag. +2 (downvote reversed) – Mr.Wizard Aug 25 '12 at 14:03


Not blacklisted yet due to the low volume, but probably a good candidate.


Another sign that the "missing" tag is not considered valuable on stackoverflow.com: It is not used by experienced users; the users who asked the 15 newest questions tagged with "missing" have median reputation of 6 (at the time of writing this).

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