has 74 questions and a majority of the questions seem to be intended to ask about grammaticality, correctness (not correction) and proof-reading for some phrases and sentences, for example:






Could you please tell me the answer and why?


Where does the [sic] go in this sentence?


I can't list all the questions. Would it be OK to synonymize with since we don't allow proof-reading and there is no proof-reading tag?

I think it is more efficient than unnecessarily editing all the 74 questions just to remove the . Thoughts, please?

2 Answers 2


My view is that is being used almost as a meta tag, rather like . It's not tagging questions about correction and the correction process, but tagging questions which ask for correction. In fact, I find it difficult to imagine on-topic questions about correction.

If that is indeed its primary use, it should be removed, not synonymised — and probably blacklisted.

(And yes, that will bump all those questions. But that effect is temporary.)

  • 1
    Blacklisting is incompatible with synonymising. Blacklisting requires input from SE staff, and they won't do it if the tag is still in use. It must be removed for blacklisting to happen.
    – Andrew Leach Mod
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 15:01
  • @Rathony that's unlikely gonna happen.Shog explains blacklisting here.
    – Helmar
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 15:27
  • @Rathony technical feasibility does not seem to support your suggestion though: meta.stackexchange.com/a/242661/338924
    – Helmar
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 15:35
  • @Rathony so what. That's still the status quo regarding tags. There is nothing that says they changed anything that I could find.
    – Helmar
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 15:40
  • @Rathony There is no solution which does not involve bumping questions. In fact, bumping questions on tag edits is actually desirable (so that others can check the result is what is intended), and there have been questions and answers on Meta about that in the past. Blacklisted tags cannot and must not exist; and synonyms are a means of existing.
    – Andrew Leach Mod
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 16:46
  • @Everyone Please ensure comments on answers are relevant to the answer.
    – Andrew Leach Mod
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 16:48
  • @AndrewLeach I understand. But it seems that SE staff can mass-edit the tags without bumping the questions. I've not confirmed it yet. Also, what's wrong with leaving the "correction" tag? Many people come here to correct their sentences. I think the correction tag is very close to grammaticality and there are many questions under the grammaticality tag that are as useless as those under the correction tag. What I wonder is, is it worth removing and blacklisting the tag? If you think so, I will leave it at that and will not raise any issue. I just tried my best not to bump 74 questions.
    – user140086
    Commented Nov 25, 2016 at 16:49
  • I've started to burninate the correction tag, 5 posts today from the oldest and invited @Helmar to join me. I will edit around 5 posts every day (when I have time) to minimize the impact on the front page. Will let you know when it is done. You are welcome to join it.
    – user140086
    Commented Nov 28, 2016 at 14:01

This would be a terrible idea. If we would make correction a synonym of grammaticality the auto-suggest shows the parent tag. We already set this unfortunate precedent with correct and correctness. Whenever anyone types correct in the tag field this shows up. Making the people believe they tread the same path as nearly 4k other users before.

enter image description here

Burnination would lead to this, a first road bump when creating shitty correction questions:

enter image description here

And subsequent blacklisting would lead to this for the persistent user:

enter image description here

Thus, the decision to synonymize would create the impression of 4k precedents while burninating and blacklisting has a serious chance of stopping such bad questions.


You must log in to answer this question.