30

Questions tagged are semi-official and should contain reliable and high quality content.

However, here on Meta Stack Exchange, as per policy, all of them are also marked as Community Wiki, which means that any user with at least 100 reputation (even a brand new user who just joined the site and has the association bonus) can edit them without review, and this can lead to wrong/bad content.

Take this edit for example. User "added a new question" to the FAQ, which also happened to already be answered in an existing section of the FAQ. This is utterly wrong. It took over 20 days until someone spotted this and rolled back this invalid edit.

I don't blame the user who edited, they are new to the system and have no idea how it works.

That is why I suggest that on questions tagged , the expanded editing privileges conferred by CW status doesn't apply, so users without the full editing privilege (<2,000 rep) won't be able to directly edit the question or any of its answers, just suggest edits.

This situation can't be resolved by simply removing CW status on FAQ posts and recanting the policy that requires them to be CW, as one of the reasons it was put into place was because FAQ posts are community-curated and no one user should earn rep from them. However, it has the added disadvantage that unfamiliar users can make bad edits, as what happened above.

The tag is a moderator-only tag, so it can't be abused by regular users to prevent edits to non-FAQ posts.

On per-site metas, users can't suggest edits, so making the FAQ questions into CW is required to give low-rep users the ability to contribute. I prefer not to interfere with that, so this request applies to MSE only.

  • 1
    Back on topic: How did that edit got approved anyway? None of the editors have full edit privileges but I can't find an approve for that edit in the suggested edit queue. Timeline isn't decisive either. Am I missing something? – rene Sep 28 '17 at 8:45
  • On Meta Stack Overflow, most faq are CW as well. – Glorfindel Sep 28 '17 at 8:49
  • 2
    @rene CW means any user with 101 rep and above can edit. (All good, we all have those moments. ;)) – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 8:51
  • @Glorfindel most because they were migrated from here, though I noticed moderators do apply it on newer faq posts. Guess better edit the question then. :) – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 8:52
  • @ShaWizDowArd I'm not familiar with the robo reviewing problem on the super meta.. is it a problem here? To get to the point; if it is, I would feel that suggestions shouldn't be allowed either. – Daedalus Sep 28 '17 at 8:56
  • 5
    @Daedalus it's not robo reviewing. The whole point is that there is no review since those are CW questions. With review, most of the bad edits are indeed blocked, and that's what I suggest here. – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 8:59
  • @ShaWizDowArd I'm not suggesting that the particular edit in this question was the result of robo-reviewing; I'm asking if robo-reviewing is as much of a problem on the uber meta as it is on SO, and if it is, if the change you're suggesting should even still have any suggested edits at all. – Daedalus Sep 28 '17 at 9:02
  • 2
    @Daedalus oh, I see. Luckily enough, here on MSE it's fine for now and there are no robo reviewers. :) – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 9:05
  • In the How to add to the FAQ on SO (right at the bottom) it's deliberately made CW to avoid requiring full editing privs to update them since you can't suggest edits on child-metas... So just removing the CW status would solve those cases... – Jon Clements Sep 28 '17 at 10:02
  • @Jon good point. This changes things (again), so think I'll focus the request only on MSE. I don't want to have two requests in one question and prefer not to "touch" the CW of existing faq posts. What do you think? – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 10:14
  • 1
    @Sha I think focusing on MSE makes most sense as it's really the odd one out and that leaves child metas to decide on their own FAQ policies as needed for their specific community requirements/needs... – Jon Clements Sep 28 '17 at 10:18
  • 1
    @Sha of course now - instead of a feature request it's really more a discussion of "do we really need faqs to be CW" as I doubt any changes will be made to mod only tags when the obvious way around it is for staff to just go through and unwiki them or just outright lock them if necessary... – Jon Clements Sep 28 '17 at 11:09
  • 1
    @iDebug no, better not make it complicated. Just omit the CW check if there is faq tag and that's it, should be pretty simple to implement. – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 11:09
  • 1
    @iDebug no, this will also lead to the answers being non-CW and cause gain of reputation, which isn't really fair. Like I said to Jon, CW or no CW is worthy of a different, separate, discussion. – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 11:14
  • 3
    @Pandya starting from the end, fact is we missed that bad edit. Only the anonymous editor we have here spotted it 20 days later and reverted. As for association bonus, it means the user is familiar with one site, but MSE is very different, so usually it's meaningless in here. – Shadow The Curly Braced Wizard Sep 28 '17 at 13:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .