1

Tags are keywords or labels that categorize and group your question with other, similar questions. ('tags' wiki excerpt)

Questions related to size of Close Votes review queue at Stack Overflow are rather popular*, how to tag these?


Of existing tags, the following seem to apply:

  • (1,5K+ questions in tag)

    For questions about the /review path where users can view and act on posts by other users that the system thinks may need attention.

  • (900+ questions in tag)

    Voting to close is the process by which users can vote to close a question if it is off-topic or otherwise disallowed by the FAQ.

  • (4K+ questions in tag)

    Questions specific to stackoverflow.com and not necessarily related to other Stack Exchange network websites, such as retag requests.

Per my reading, these three tags together sufficiently qualify questions about CV queue size, while none of them alone appears to suffice.

Is one expected to use all three tags for this kind of questions?

For the reference: results of the search by combination of tags review, vote-to-close and stackoverflow.

closed as off-topic by gnat, Martijn Pieters, michaelb958--Reinstate Monica, hims056, random Apr 24 '14 at 4:47

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." – gnat, Martijn Pieters, michaelb958--Reinstate Monica, hims056, random
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    Those tags are fine. No need to overthink it. Can you explain why you think this needs more meticuluous judgment? I'm actually downvoting this for now since you need to clarify what the issue is. – djechlin Aug 4 '13 at 13:29
  • 1
    close-votes-review seems appropriate, that is if its really needed. – asheeshr Aug 4 '13 at 13:32
  • 2
    Is this some kind of butt-hurt in response to the close-votes-queue and close-votes-queue-size tags that you created yesterday being synonymized with vote-to-close? I really don't see why we need a special tag for this. The synonym seems perfectly appropriate. – Cody Gray Aug 4 '13 at 13:42
  • @djechlin this is not an issue to me, please see how tag support is defined: "request for assistance with one of the site's features...": in this case I requested an assistance about how to tag particular kind questions. – gnat Aug 20 '13 at 1:53
  • 2
    @CodyGray well my initial reaction to that tag synonymizing was rather positive, wow great, there is already a way to tag this stuff. It's only when I discovered that "synonym target" tag is not as appropriate as you probably think (it has ~1K questions, vast majority of which have nothing to do with queue / review at all), that I tried to figure how to do it using existing tags and asked to help / confirm if my findings are correct – gnat Aug 20 '13 at 11:19
  • 11 upvotes - not bad for the post that has been initially voted down to -10 – gnat Nov 22 '13 at 17:39
10
+50

Yes, that is exactly the tagging method you should use. The tag indicates you're talking about review, the tag isolates that to just the Close Votes queue, and the tag would isolate that even further to just the Close Votes queue on Stack Overflow. Plus you still have an extra tag left over.

The size of the Close Votes queue on Stack Overflow is too specific of an issue to warrant a tag. As Martijn points out, the size of the queue is only one thing. Ultimately all of the separate questions are only identifying the size as the reason for wanting some change to the Close Votes queue, which would be the real topic of the question. It makes more sense to have them all under one question identifying the size as the problem, with answers identifying possible [alternate] solutions to that problem. They're already linked by being duplicates, which keeps them grouped together; we don't need a tag to do that.


not giving it a tag looks rather like plain unwillingness to acknowledge a problem of The Queue

That's a bold statement that's completely wrong. Stack Exchange has acknowledged the problem, and a tag is not needed to indicate their acknowledgement of it. There's also a second problem: there's way too many duplicate questions about this issue. We could easily get by with only 1 or 2 questions about the size of the Close Votes review queue, which definitely wouldn't require a tag at all. A lot of them are already closed as duplicates anyways.

You're basically trying to combine all three of the tags I mentioned above into one, very long tag when they don't need to be combined. People keep saying we need a single tag so we can find them all easier - no we don't. They're just as easy to find if they're tagged correctly with the above three tags.

  • 2
    this answer makes a good food for thought - thanks – gnat Aug 5 '13 at 7:13
2

I don't really see why we need this tag. This is about a recurring issue, not a topic. Most of the questions that could be tagged with are really all just one question, and the rest are dupes or outdated versions of it.

2

There are no queue-specific tags that I'm aware of; if existed, then + would be the appropriate combo.

But in practice, most questions on queues follow the + [queue-subject] pattern, so the three tags you cite would suffice to identify a post on a specific queue on a specific site.

  • 1
    The only other one that existed was suggested-edit-queue which was long ago synonymized into suggested-edits. – animuson Aug 4 '13 at 17:45
  • back then in August, this was an acceptable answer. After four months, 40 more complaints at MSO and September meeting though, not giving it a tag looks rather like plain unwillingness to acknowledge a problem of The Queue – gnat Nov 21 '13 at 0:37
  • 1
    I'm not sure how much more acknowledgement I could give it without becoming a Single Issue Candidate, @gnat. I've acknowledged it. Multiple times. Doesn't make it the single biggest problem facing Stack Overflow or my top priority though - sorry, I'm not trying to ignore it, but sometimes there are bigger fish to fry. – Shog9 Nov 21 '13 at 16:50
-1

I'm not really sure why there's a bounty on this question, as your recent edits don't seem to actually change what you're asking, and (at least in my mind) animuson's answer still holds: Yes, use all three of those tags.

The problem animuson mentions is also still a problem:

there's way too many duplicate questions about this issue. We could easily get by with only 1 or 2 questions about the size of the Close Votes review queue, which definitely wouldn't require a tag at all. A lot of them are already closed as duplicates anyways.

There does not need to be a new, long, ultra-specific tag to deal with this issue because, quite frankly, most people are asking repeat questions of "Why is the queue so big?" or "What are we going to do about the size of the queue?"

  • 1
    worth noting that 3-tags approach provokes proliferation of duplicates. When there's one tag, one can simply click it and reviw similar questions to find out if one they're going to post is already there. Multi-tags also make dupe-closing harder, for the same reasoning. It is not reasonable to expect that lots of users are 1) aware that queue questions match 3 tags and 2) understand how to list questions tagged that way. – gnat Nov 29 '13 at 13:33
  • @gnat I think you're overestimating how many people search for, then browse through all questions in a given tag before posting. I suspect the far more common case is that people type a question title into search and scan the results, if they bother to check at all before posting. I can accept that it may make it slightly harder to find duplicates if you have to pay attention to tag combinations, but that does not, in my mind, justify using an ultra-specific tag when that particular tag really should only have one or two questions in it. Sorry. – Laura Nov 29 '13 at 16:12
  • okay, let's wait and see. 4 months ago, when I posted this question, I would accept this reasoning. As time passes by, and as similar questions pile on, 5-10 a month, it just looks less and less compelling. Maybe (hopefully) 4 months later, I'll find this topic in a decline and the reasoning about it being too narrow get back stronger, as it was 4 months ago – gnat Nov 29 '13 at 16:31
  • 1
    @gnat - "worth noting that 3-tags approach provokes proliferation of duplicates..." - I'd go further and say there's nothing intuitive about using three tags when a user expect one tag. I'm not sure any self-respecting UX designer would agree with 3-tags approach. But I'm not a UX designer, I'm just a dumb user.... – user173448 May 7 '15 at 20:54

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