I just happened to get this suggested tag-edit in the "Suggested Edits" review queue. The tag edit was very nice and proper but Alas!, it completely changes the meaning of what the tag was originally meant for.

Originally when the tag was created, it was meant for the Problem Steps Recorder utility in Windows 7. But this edit, changes the wiki to make this tag represent PHP Standards Recommendation for PHP.

I initially thought of rejecting it on the first go, as it was a completely different from the original, but then I decided to just have a look at the questions under the tag. And tada!, what I find is, there are 9 questions tagged to it(the tag), out of which only 3 questions refer to the Problem Steps Recorder and the rest 6 questions refer to PHP Standards Recommendation.

What do I do in such a case? Approve the edit(as it seems to be genuine), reject it(as it completely changes the original), create a new tag for the other, or just let it go(which I don't want to)?

  • 1
    Dunno what I would do RE the edit; probably reject it. But my opinion is the tag probably needs to die. Only 9 questions on it, so it wouldn't be hard. Seems really susceptible to this sort of ambiguity. – Andrew Barber Nov 27 '13 at 5:48
  • @AndrewBarber - And the reason I would be choosing for rejecting the edit would be? Or do I need to give a custom reason and hope that one of you mods pick it up and clean this tag? – SudoRahul Nov 27 '13 at 5:52
  • I would probably go for the one about not being an appropriate Wiki edit (I forget how it's worded); but the reject reason that specifically mentions Wikis. But that's assuming that the new description is 'correct' where the old one was not. Which I don't think is the case (I think both suck!) – Andrew Barber Nov 27 '13 at 5:54
  • @AndrewBarber - You're both helping me and not (O_o). Anyways, I rejected it for now, but I would love an answer for this(specially from a mod), with the various scenarios when it can be accepted and when not. And yes I agree, both suck! :D – SudoRahul Nov 27 '13 at 6:06
  • I am always happy to help & not help at the same time! hehe – Andrew Barber Nov 27 '13 at 14:48

A tag with more than one possible but conflicting definition is a tag that should be cleansed with the fires of burnination. An ambiguous tag is a bad tag. No amount of tag wiki contributions will ever be able to successfully resolve the conflict among the multiple definitions.

When alerted to the possible conflict because you were reviewing edits, you should consider doing what you've just done -- popping over to Meta to get some opinions on the matter. Shortly thereafter, one of us righteous tries-to-do-gooders will come along and spout some hot air about the matter.

There are a lot of naming conflicts in the software world. If at all possible, multiple tags should be created to resolve naming conflict ambiguity in a completely unambiguous way. When possible, disambiguation of a tag name should make it obvious which is what and who is where. For example, was deemed excessively ambiguous. It was split into and in order to remove the ambiguity.

In the case of , the course is clear. The Windows Problem Steps Recorder should not be acronymized, and any PHP questions talking about "PSR" without a number need retagging.

I've created for the PSR questions. Please examine the questions closely, as one of the three requires some closevote TLC. I have not created an excerpt or wiki.

Of the remaining questions, most (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) were related to but not directly about the PSR-1 and PSR-2 coding standards. Most had and all now have the tag, which sufficiently classified them. Two were hard questions about PSR-2 itself, thus actually suggesting as a thing. I've added a simple excerpt and stub wiki for people that can't Google.

One was actually about and has been appropriately reclassified. I've added a simple excerpt and pathetic stub wiki for people that can't Google.

As of now, is empty. I've added it to my list of 123 tags I try to prevent from coming back from the dead.

  • 1
    Is the righteous tries-to-do-gooders group for real? Wow, that's so AWESOME! :) Anyways, I guess this is the right thing to be done for such a scenario. Really appreciate your help. – SudoRahul Nov 27 '13 at 7:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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