Is there any value in the tag correction? Currently 87 questions are infected with that hideous tag.

Since unspecified proofreading is off-topic I don't think this should be used as tag anywhere. We already have grammaticality, orthography & punctuation for the usual suspects regarding corrections. Naturally, there is no usage guide whatsoever.

Following the guideline from Meta.SE on burninating I answer the following questions:

  1. Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? and is it unambiguous?

    Of course not, we have no idea what should be corrected.

  2. Is the concept described even on-topic for the site?

    Depends, but we do have specific tags for the different areas of possible corrections and specifying the concern is mandatory.

  3. Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post?

    Other than a disregard for existing and more used tags? No.

  4. Does it mean the same thing in all common contexts?

    Not really, it can everything from acceptable questions to a lazy cop-out homework/proofreading replacement.


Let's get rid of it.

Edit 07.11.2016: After +4/-4 votes and a tumbleweed badge (yay!) I would love to hear from the down voters what merit they do see in the tag.

Edit 24.11.2016: I started removing the tag after reaching net +6. We are now down to 75 questions and I encourage everyone to pitch in.

Edit 03.12.2016: The questions have all been edited in a community effort. The nightly roomba should take care of the rest.

  • 2
    I agree with you, what merit does the tag have? I'm for burnination! Commented Nov 9, 2016 at 17:04
  • 2
    I've perused many of the questions with that tag and conclude that the tag doesn't provide any useful information about the questions, isn't used consistently, and doesn't group questions together at all. I vote for burnination. Commented Nov 24, 2016 at 18:50
  • Just looking back at this, I agree with the burnination but what do we tag questions that have simply asked for proof-reading, have been closed and simply exist as closed questions? Will they be automatically deleted after a set amount of time? Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 17:31
  • @BladorthinTheGrey depends. If there's no answer and you can down vote the question to negative it does get deleted. Requirements for deletion. Otherwise we have to find a fitting tag or lobby 10k users to delete it outright with delete votes.
    – Helmar
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 18:09
  • 2
    I think you have enough consensus and let's do it together. Which will be better? (1) you and I edit, say, 5 posts per day (10 X 7 days), (2) do it all at once? I will wait for your reply.
    – user140086
    Commented Nov 28, 2016 at 12:30
  • I have started to edit those posts on my own from the oldest post and I will continue to do it five posts per day to minimize the interruption to the front page. When you edit the posts, please make sure you edit other parts (typos, clarity, other tags, grammar, etc). You can review my first five edits in my edit.
    – user140086
    Commented Nov 28, 2016 at 13:52
  • I suppose it could be used in the more abstract sense of "Was so-and-so correct by correcting me when I said such-and-such?"
    – Dog Lover
    Commented Dec 2, 2016 at 9:19
  • 1
    I am assuming the tag removal is under way, so I'll remove the featured Commented Dec 2, 2016 at 14:47
  • @MattE.Эллен yes it is. Nearly completed actually. Thank you for shining the light on it for a while. :)
    – Helmar
    Commented Dec 3, 2016 at 11:50
  • And what about the tag hypercorrection? Let's get rid of that, too. 18 questions so tagged. "The hypercorrection tag has no usage guidance, can you help us create it?" No, let's burniate it.
    – ab2
    Commented Dec 3, 2016 at 15:26
  • @ab2 I'd agree that it is also worth getting rid of.
    – Helmar
    Commented Dec 3, 2016 at 15:57


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .