I admire the way tags are used/implemented on Stack Exchange. They seem like a variation, or illustration, of:

  • "You only get one chance to make a first impression".
  • "How would you describe your product or service if you only get 10 seconds in a commercial".

So I started doing a few wiki tag / wiki excerpt edits the past few weeks or so (partially based on learning from mistakes, sorry). Based on the overall approval/rejection rate (on a few different Stack Exchange sites), I have the impression that most of my suggestions are a kind of appreciated. Which in turn seems to have resulted in "some" increase of my points of course (and hence also my privileges). Sounds like win-win, no? may want to take note ... Especially because it can assist 'lurkers' (Stack Exchange language is in English ...).

When writing "code" (PHP, Rexx, etc.), my style is what I think is called an iterative approach: I change a few lines, test all possible scenarios to that line (and fix it where needed), and then use Git to CAFAI (= Commit-And-Forget-About-It), considering it like "I tested those lines enough, what's next on my list?".

I'm now considering taking wiki edits a step further, i.e. by starting to suggest even more wiki edits. Therefore I would like to also use such iterative approach for "tech writing", whereas the "reviews" of my suggestions are like "testing" each of such iterations. That approach seems to have quite a few advantages for both parties involved (me as the editor suggesting it, and the reviewers that will have to approve or reject them). Note to myself (and/or you): add some samples of these advantages, to better illustrate them (iteration at work...).

For the sake of understanding, here are some samples of edits that I consider as minor fixes (as in the title), which are not appropriate for being considered as such "iterative edit" (i.e.: a suggested edit with only such fixes should be avoided):

  • fixes consisting of only a very few grammar fixes (like typo corrections in just a few words).
  • edits that are like work-in-progress or draft versions fixes (= half-baked fixes?), such edits should temporarily be saved somewhere else, instead of trying to use Stack Exchange as a temporary storage for them.
  • ... (for sure there are more of such variations to be excluded as a candidate for such iterative fixes, feel free to complete).

Somehow related questions / topics:

Note to myself: try to add some links to help documentation for more information on good and/or bad practises for suggesting fixes.

However I want to avoid, at any price, some of the potential negative side-effects of such iterative wiki editing. Note to myself (and/or you): add some samples of them, to better illustrate them (iteration at work ...). The most important one (to me), and which already happened, is that it may be perceived as "You are just trying to get X times the award (or extra badges?) for an accepted wiki edit (because of the X iterations), while you could have achieved the very same wiki update with just 1 iteration)". Even though I can not proof it, I can only answer to such perception like "You don't know me well enough to realise that that is NOT what counts for me ... My goal is to enhance a wiki tag/excerpt, using an approach that 'I' feel most appropriate. You know what: you can also suggest edits for all those same tags ... Even deciding on which tags to start working on is an iterative process, which you might consider as 'my' strategy to achieve 'my' goal ... and which is NOT about reputation ... trust me.".

My question: Is iterative refinement of the same wiki tag/excerpt with more than just minor fixes OK?

Note: before asking this question, and out of respect for "James" (curious to get his valuable feedback if he ever discovers my question here), I performed this search. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that question is a variation of what I'm asking here (which is about wiki tags / excerpts).

  • 2
    The set of people privileged enough to do the tag wiki reviews is very small on most sites. Please don't drown them with a series of half-baked or minor edits. You can do your iterations all you want in Notepad or your favorite editor, commit (i.e. submit) when your work is done.
    – Mat
    Mar 16, 2015 at 13:20
  • Mat, thanks for feedback (at light speed right after posting!). I'm fairly newbie (sorry), trying to do my best, comply with etiquette, etc (so sorry if I make mistakes in comments and please correct me if needed, ok?). Good to know about the privileges (feel free to add it to my question, otherwise I can do it later on). I need time to go lookup "drown", but you suggest a variation of "just grammar fixes" (as in my title), right? Your "notepad" remark is valid, but would you mind reviewing the related post (if you didn't) to read about the arguments that there are other variations too? Mar 16, 2015 at 13:29
  • 1
    Tag wiki edits and question/answer edits are completely different things. I don't see how the question you linked to applies. (And just a note: keep it short and to the point.)
    – Mat
    Mar 16, 2015 at 13:32
  • Mat, I expanded the question with "minor edits". Other updates related to feedback will follow (other duties right now, sorry for that). I'll suggest another wiki-edit later on today of something I want to use as a (perfect I think) sample/demo of an iterative refinement. Sorry, but I do my best at keeping it short (switching to Dutch would make it shorter probably ...). Mar 16, 2015 at 13:58


You must log in to answer this question.