up vote 1 down vote favorite

I don't understand the tag (added here). It seems to be about the form of the question, rather than the topic. It doesn't work as the sole tag on a question, and it is fairly subjective (how detailed does a proof idea in a question have to be to earn the tag?) — the criteria for a meta tag. I can't think of a use subscribing to it, ignoring it or searching for it. What good is this tag?

share
2  
I can see users ignoring it – Artem Kaznatcheev May 12 '12 at 3:08
I am not sure if this constitutes a meta-tag. We get questions were the OP is explicitly asking if a particular proof stated in the question is correct, i.e. wants to get the verification of the state proof by others. So it is not subjective in any way. If such questions are fine then I think the tag is a reasonable one. I am not sure what you mean by it not being able to be the sole tag on a question, it does describe the content of the question. (the phrase meta-tag is not well-defined or clear, if you think a tag is bad just directly explain why you think so). – Kaveh May 12 '12 at 4:54
@Kaveh I'm using “meta tag” in the sense described in the SO blog post that I link to. I've already explained why I think the tag is bad (meta tag → bad). – Gilles♦ May 12 '12 at 15:58
1  
@Gilles, the meaning of meta-tag is not clear for me, indeed it seems a quite subjective term in itself, "meta tag -> bad" doesn't give much information about why the tag is bad, e.g. in this cases the tag is not subjective and does describe the contents of the question, it is not clear to me what it means when you are saying it cannot be the sole tag on a question, and as Artem mentioned it can be useful for searching/filtering questions. – Kaveh May 12 '12 at 20:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged