I would like to know the reason why this answer was deleted. Here is the full content of the answer:

Try http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/msearch.el All occurences of the text selected with the cursor are highlighted. You have to drag over the string which you want to highlight. That enables you to easily change the selection without changing the highlight.

If you want to preserve the highlighting of a string you can freeze it.

You can enslave a buffer to another buffer. Text selected in the master buffer will also be highlighted in the slave buffer. That is useful for comparing buffers. It is also useful for taking notes in one buffer while you investigate the text in another one. You can have a collection of keywords in the notes buffer. Drag over such a keyword and its occurences in the investigated text will be highlighted.

I am using this stuff for years now. I added the freezing quite recently. So, maybe something is broken. If this is the case leave me a note on http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/msearch or here.

I already visited the potential reasons in the Help Center, but could not find a direct match.

  • The answer fits the question. (Highlighting all occurrences of a word selected with the mouse.) The highlighting keeps permanent when the cursor moves due to a vscroll. (That is the actual reason for the restriction that you have to select the word with a mouse-drag motion.)
  • It is not an exact duplicate of other answers.
  • It is essentially more than a link to an external site.

So, what is the actual reason for deleting it?

  • This is answer, not comment. Aug 26, 2013 at 11:06
  • 3
    Perhaps you want to add a screenshot of the answer (for the people with <10K rep)
    – user000001
    Aug 26, 2013 at 11:18
  • Most likely it was confused with a spam post. Aug 26, 2013 at 11:33
  • 1
    Eh, it wasn't flagged @JanDvorak - and passed two reviews. Thinking this was just a case of fat fingers.
    – Tim Post
    Aug 26, 2013 at 11:39
  • I'm the one who deleted it, and I can say that Tim's answer below is exactly correct. And a +1 for a very constructive question about the deletion here! Aug 26, 2013 at 13:49

1 Answer 1


This was probably a mistake that repetitive action can sometimes bring, a case of too many open tabs or just one of those flukes that happens from time to time. The answer was previously reviewed by two users with satisfactory result, not flagged for any reason and though it does depend on some links, the content of those links would be very difficult to reproduce in the answer itself (that's quite a bit of code).

I've restored the answer, apologies for the mistake.

  • 3
    This is exactly the answer; I'm the one who deleted it, which I did along with another similar post which did need to be deleted. I knee-jerked/fat-fingered this one, obviously. It should not have been deleted on its own. Aug 26, 2013 at 13:48

You must log in to answer this question.

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