What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 129 Stack Exchange communities.

tag wiki excerpt says

inappropriate questions used to justify posting of new similar questions...

But in Tags screen it is cut to

justify posting of new similar questions...

Based on similar change done per discussion at WP Meta I suggested the edit for excerpt intended to show more complete text: these are inappropriate questions used to justify posting of....

My edit has been rejected as too minor. Is that OK?

http://i.stack.imgur.com/65W4b.png

share|improve this question
    
Why does this tag even exist? We already have an so-history tag which pretty much covers this. –  animuson Sep 8 '12 at 20:22
    
@animuson see What is the meaning of the “broken-windows” tag? As for so-history, well "questions about the past" to me sound like a different matter than "why can't I ask X when Y exists" –  gnat Sep 8 '12 at 20:30
1  
I'm aware of what it means, but I still feel like the tag covers this. - Use this tag for questions about the past of Stack Exchange. What was done back in the day, why they did it, and why we *don't* do it now. - I really don't see why we need two separate tags for this, when both of them are barely used. Also, a lot of people won't know what broken windows means. History is a much more clear term. –  animuson Sep 8 '12 at 20:32
    
@animuson I see, interesting. You certaily have a point here –  gnat Sep 8 '12 at 20:34
    
Also, I'm not a fan of tags specifically for "these questions are inappropriate." If they're not appropriate, delete them. The ones that are appropriate should be in an appropriate category. –  animuson Sep 8 '12 at 20:35

2 Answers 2

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I rejected it because adding just two words is in my opinion too minor. And on meta, a single reject vote is enough.

If you have special reasons (like the one you mentioned in the post), please add it in the edit reasons, to help deciding. Be sure to focus on the fact you know it is a minor edit, but you have a perfect justification for it.

In order to decide if the reject was ok or not, I'm afraid we need a better (more concrete) definition of too minor. Which should be different for tag edits than for post edits.

share|improve this answer
1  
the edit reason was written as "workaround for incorrectly cut excerpt display bug recently reported at WP Meta: meta.workplace.stackexchange.com/a/424/168"; - what else would you suggest to add? –  gnat Sep 8 '12 at 13:51
1  
Something like: Minor edit justified because else the excerpt is cut in a way the meaning becomes different. (Just be sure you are aware it is a minor edit and you have a justification) –  Toon Krijthe Sep 8 '12 at 13:57
    
OK suggested edit has been re-submitted with edit reason like you describe and approved –  gnat Sep 8 '12 at 14:14
    
And it is already accepted. Problem solved. ;-). –  Toon Krijthe Sep 8 '12 at 14:16

I think it is better when the tag excerpt is written as a sentence, and I also prefer when the excerpt is not truncated in the page showing all the existing tags.

It is true that truncating the tag excerpt in that page doesn't probably make sense, as the tag excerpts are not truncated in the tag popup that is visible in the same page. Still, I don't think the edit is just a workaround for a "bug" in the software; it is a way to show the full tag excerpt, and avoid new users get confused from the truncated description.

I agree, "minor edit" is someway subjective; while we probably agree that changing a single character is too minor, the upper limit for "minor edit" is probably fuzzy. To me, it is not too minor if it is helpful, and there isn't anything else that needs to be changed.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/146346/was-it-ok-to-reject-this-tag-wiki-edit/146348
meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2014-23
79498
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:OV7I5KDKUWSBOHRYMVQ64O4XTL2X4A5M
<urn:uuid:7d47df33-99ca-4098-9bd7-2430bd04be24>
2014-08-02T02:28:41Z
198.252.206.16
sha1:SE7QFXNKD6LPGQHURGRX35AGKCCPK2JE
<urn:uuid:e6c22545-2297-4499-b7bc-a96c25e602fe>
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/146346/was-it-ok-to-reject-this-tag-wiki-edit/146348
response
<urn:uuid:a4a8db11-9dcd-4ecf-9b2d-16e2f581aa0d>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-146-231-18.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2014-23
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for July 2014
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf