Here on Meta, there are two tags, and that both relate to the same thing: to report links that cause 404 errors on the site. However, the tag is also used to discuss the 404 page itself. What is the difference between the tags? Should we merge them, or change their purposes so that one is for reporting broken links and the other is for discussing the 404 page?

  • 1
    A meta-meta-stackoverflow question! – Linuxios Nov 5 '13 at 22:48
  • @Linuxios Hence tagged meta... – user215114 Nov 5 '13 at 22:49
  • 1
    I almost want to start a proposal on Area51 for Meta Meta Stackoverflow :). – Linuxios Nov 5 '13 at 22:50
  • @Linuxios I have a feeling that this would be closed as duplicate of Meta anyway... – user215114 Nov 5 '13 at 22:51
  • @Linuxios meta is meta enough – p.s.w.g Nov 5 '13 at 23:54

They're really not the same thing.

Personally, I've always thought the tag looked kind of tacky. Only a programmer would even know what that means, and this is supposed to be the hub for all network issues. It really doesn't make sense to me for that tag to exist. I'd rather it be something like , but apparently that tag is "reserved" for the 500 Internal Server Error page. Since the 404 and 500 pages are different from one another, I'm not sure how viable merging them together would be.

That being said, it's also not the same as the tag, which is for questions about broken links within posts and comments, and not about 404 error pages on the network. I've updated the tag wiki excerpt to the following:

For discussing the effects of broken links within posts and comments across the network, what to do with them, and how we can prevent them from becoming broken.

  • 1
    So that's the tag's intent. But there are questions that are tagged with broken-link that relate to network 404 errors... – user215114 Nov 5 '13 at 22:56
  • 2
    So retag them? A tag being misused is not a good reason to just merge them together. – animuson Nov 5 '13 at 22:57
  • Yeah, go ahead. It was unclear what the tag meant because it had no wiki summary, and there were lots of questions tagged with it that should have been tagged with http-404, so that's why I asked this question. I edited it to clarify. – user215114 Nov 5 '13 at 22:59
  • @animuson What about using page-not-found for the 404 tag? It's the title of the 404 page. – doppelgreener Nov 5 '13 at 23:22
  • @JonathanHobbs I like that a lot more. Done. – animuson Nov 6 '13 at 2:36

You must log in to answer this question.