For users with 500 < Reputation < 2000, there are two options: "retag" and "edit". It's great that the retag button is there, but it clutters up the question view. There is no reason the Retag option can't be merged with the Edit option.

The Edit option already knows when you are only performing a Retag - and it pops up an annoying "use the Retag option instead" message. If it's already that smart, why can't it automatically reroute the retag through to the right action?

  • 34
    This has confused users for too long. The only reason it existed was because users couldn't suggest edits once upon a time, and retagging was a legitimate privilege that let them edit the tags only. Now that users can suggest edits and access the edit screen, having separate functions seems incredibly pointless, and as stated, the system knows when a tag-only edit is made. It's time to say goodbye. – animuson Apr 20 '13 at 4:03
  • 2
    This is one of those few suggestions that actually has no holes in it. I expect to see this one applied everywhere. – user206222 Apr 20 '13 at 16:32
  • 4
    NOOO I like the retag button and wish it was still there after reaching 2k. – ɥʇǝS Apr 22 '13 at 4:01
  • 1
    @Undo SE has a piled up list of feature requests and projects to work on - rest assured, they will get to it eventually. It just might take a while. – user206222 Apr 22 '13 at 21:55
  • About the uncluttered menu - you get a "close" option at 3k and a "delete" option at 10k, so... – Doorknob May 2 '13 at 16:38
  • 2
    @Seth At 10k there is a "edit tags" button when you mouse over the right of the tags, and when clicked the tag field becomes editable. A LOT better than "retag," which brings you to a different page. – Doorknob May 2 '13 at 16:40
  • @Doorknob 10 is a long way away... but that is better than a retag button. – ɥʇǝS May 2 '13 at 16:42
  • I'm hijacking this question to point out an old bug regarding retagging: meta.stackexchange.com/q/114290/142802. If anyone decides to change the feature, please fix this! – Felix May 3 '13 at 21:52
  • @Doorknob, why on earth does easy retagging only exist at 10k, when pain in the butt retagging exists at 2k? If I have permission to edit tags then why not make it simple? (I don't -- any more -- because of the merger with edit functionality.) – yoyo Mar 23 '15 at 19:31
  • Unfortunately I have just had the system refuse a retag because I had less than 6 characters in a change to the body of the question, I wanted to change nothing but the tag. – Andrew Jan 12 '18 at 15:47

Retag is dead, long live retag.

Erm. Long live smarter edit.

Retag is gone. It has ceased to be. The "please go back and click the retag link instead of edit" message is gone. We will (not) miss it.

Editing tags only will result in the same behavior as retag, except for the message (low enough rep will put it in review queue for suggested edits, having the retag questions privilege will make it a regular edit.

  • Next build, I guess? Can still see "edit tags" when hovering there. Anyway that's a HUGE change (in the standards of recent changes which are mainly cosmetic), congrats and well done! :) – Shadow The Vaccinated Wizard May 8 '13 at 10:32
  • @ShaWizDowArd - Nope, it is out. And "edit tags" is there to stay. It is the "retag" next to the "edit" link that is gone. Go to Movies to see that it is not there for you ;) – Oded May 8 '13 at 10:34
  • Hmm.. so what about this page? I'm bit confused. – Shadow The Vaccinated Wizard May 8 '13 at 10:35
  • 2
    @ShaWizDowArd - Well, if you have the edit tags privilege (+500) but not the edit question privilege (+2000), you can make a tag only edit and it will not go to the suggested edits queue. – Oded May 8 '13 at 10:36
  • Oh, this makes more sense now. Thanks! – Shadow The Vaccinated Wizard May 8 '13 at 10:37
  • 6
    I just tried to retag a question, but it requires me to enter an edit summary. Is this an intended behavior, or should it automatically include "edited tags" as the summary when a tag only edit is done? – Antony May 8 '13 at 11:21
  • 1
    The question here should be tagged status-completed then, isn't it? – Shadow The Vaccinated Wizard May 8 '13 at 11:49
  • 1
    @ShaWizDowArd - Thanks for reminding me. – Oded May 8 '13 at 11:50
  • 2
    @Oded: So I must input at least 10 characters... – Martin Schröder May 8 '13 at 13:00
  • 1
    @MartinSchröder - Yes. Until you have edit privileges. – Oded May 8 '13 at 13:03
  • 1
    Maybe the privileges pages should be updated as well? – Undo May 8 '13 at 13:40
  • 1
    @Oded I must not be good enough. No edit link for me on Retag :( – Undo May 8 '13 at 13:42
  • 5
    I like this change, but there are a few regressions. – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' May 8 '13 at 19:19
  • 1
    Has this privilege been completely removed? I'm now getting the reviews again, even with more than 500 reputation. – Qantas 94 Heavy Aug 31 '13 at 15:32
  • 1
    Oded, please clarify. On just editing a message and adding only two tags, my suggested change went to the edit queue. Ultimately, three of the five reviewers rejected my retag edit with: This edit is too minor; suggested edits should be substantive improvements addressing multiple issues in the post. – DavidRR Nov 30 '13 at 1:09

Yes please!

In addition to the benefits mentioned in the question this will also put a small impediment in front of a small group, who I'm going to call the "re-taggers". This group has 2 factions:

  1. The "I can create tags. Look, that question needs a new tag. Let's add it. Do any other questions need the same tag? Look, there's 20 of them. I know they need editing but..." faction.
  2. The "That question needs editing but, you know, I need to have an edit approved so I'll just re-tag it." faction.

Both factions are, essentially, harmless. However, having the ability to re-tag without having to edit the question means that they take the quick and easy option. If the option didn't exist they might be encouraged to edit more1.

My one concern would be that it might hinder decent re-tagging behaviour. If someone re-tagged and edited it would go into the suggested edits queue; it's possible that people will stop editing just to get their re-tag done quickly.

1. I doubt it'd make that much difference but it might nudge2 them in the right direction.
2. Pity me.

  • 1
    how about have the retag go through immediately and put the edit in the suggested edits queue. if the edit gets rejected, then the retag is rolled back too. – Jakob Weisblat Apr 23 '13 at 23:11
  • 2
    +1 for the nested footnotes (But the answer was good too). – Ben Lee Apr 25 '13 at 20:46
  • You forgot the third group, which just cares for the tags (they have a value). – Martin Schröder Jul 4 '13 at 8:32
  • Reread the last paragraph @Martin... I say the groups are small at the beginning. I don't say that the majority of people abused the option anywhere. – ben is uǝq backwards Jul 4 '13 at 9:07
  • Plus, my point is that just caring for the tags isn't enough @Martin... You should edit everything if there's something to do. – ben is uǝq backwards Jul 4 '13 at 9:10

It's kinda strange that while you can retag questions without problems in the 500-2000 range, if you retag AND edit them it goes to the the edit queue. This might have some valid points (if the new tags are only valid if your edit is approved, but in this case maybe your edit is invalid anyway)

So one more proposal: if the retag option is killed then, when editing, retags should be instantly applied, and only the actual edit of the post should go to the review queue. The two revision could be merged after the post edit is approved, so there won't be separate revisions for the retag and the edit.

  • 4
    No, then a user would be making two separate revisions to the post in the end, which would be incredibly annoying. – animuson Apr 20 '13 at 14:51
  • 3
    The two revision could be merged after the post edit is approved. I'm just saying that the retag should be visible instantly, while the edit should wait for approval. If it gets rejected only the retag remains. If it is approved both become visible. It is still better if someone does it in two steps, when it won't be merged into one revision anyway. – SztupY Apr 20 '13 at 17:31
  • 1
    We are all programmers here aren't we? This is not rocket science. – Pieter Geerkens Apr 22 '13 at 4:17

I noticed today that the "retag" button had disappeared. I read this whole topic to know why and I understand the motive. While I admit the motivations are good and that it makes the interface lighter and reduces ambiguity.

However, I would not say there are no holes at all. There is actually one little drawback: my "edit" button is blocked - I won't complain, if I am blocked, that just means there are good reasons for me to be blocked -, and I could still still retag questions, which I consider harmless compared to editing and less error-prone. But now that the "retag" button disappeared, I simply cannot retag any question anymore.

I will not claim it back, but I wanted you all to know there are actual drawbacks, even if not that big :)

  • Sorry - I guess it's my fault :) There are still bugs to be ironed out - there are many small factions like this that need addressed. This could even be fixed by 1. Adding back the Retag button for those banned, or 2. Just greying out the title and body field for those 500>rep>2000 with edit ban. – Undo May 8 '13 at 18:23
  • 1
    @Undo The first one is simple but would rise problems like "I had the retag button when I couldn't edit. I love this button. Can we have it when our edit is not blocked too?". So I would go for the second option, just to avoid that problem :p – Morwenn May 8 '13 at 18:27
  • 1
    Yep, you're probably right. Thanks to you for searching Meta instead of posting an 'AAACK! I NO HAS A RETAGZ BUTTON!' complaint :) – Undo May 8 '13 at 18:50
  • @Undo Haha, I don't like to post that kind of crazy stuff and meta is really useful to deal with that kind of problems :) – Morwenn May 8 '13 at 18:51
  • I don't like to post it - or read it either :) I hope that SE gets this all figured out for you! – Undo May 8 '13 at 18:52

After reading this change, I understand why it was made, and it's probably for the best. But this change confused me in a way that caused an edit of mine to be unfairly rejected. I think this new feature could be improved to prevent that confusion.

Here's how my problem came about: I wanted to retag a question. I looked for the old retag link – but it was gone! Fine, I thought, I'll just edit the question. And then I edited the tags in the question. But then I remembered the rule of editing “make substantial edits”. If I just change the tags, I thought, my edit won't be substantial enough and it will be rejected. I guess I have to change more things, to make my edit substantial. Weird – I wonder where the retag feature went. So I also changed one little thing in the question body in my edit to try to make it more substantial, and then I submitted my edit suggestion.

But after a few minutes, my edit suggestion was rejected. I'm not sure if it was because it was too insubstantial – my suggestion was “Rejected”, but a reviewer chose the Edit option to post it after editing the tags further. But it is at least possible that I would have had the edit straight-out rejected for being too minor. Either way, that edit increased my “rejected edits” statistic by one, which I did not deserve. If I had known the new method of retagging, I wouldn’t have also edited the body of the question, leading to the rejection. But the site failed to communicate to me the method of editing tags without the edit being reviewed.

To fix this, users should somehow be told that edits of only tags will happen instantly, unlike most edits. One way to do that would be to change the label of the “Save Edits” button, depending on what edits the user is making. As soon as the user edits something other than the tags, the button label could change to “Suggest Edits” or “Propose Edits”. Alternatively, we could just state in the “How to Tag” sidebar that “edits of only tags will automatically be accepted”. Or perhaps the tag-editing field could have a different background style from the rest of the page to subtly suggest that editing it will work differently.

You must log in to answer this question.

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