18
\$\begingroup\$

Following the highly supported answer here: Why do we use [Published-Adventures] instead of more specific tags? I feel like adding specific tags to questions about specific adventures is a good idea. However, if I do so, I'll bump tons of old questions, which could drown out some of today's actual questions, making them less likely to get good answers and attention.

What's the most responsible way to mass-update tags on many questions?

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I tend to limit how much I do at any one point when doing massive updates like this. I usually do about 20, and try to spread them out temporally. this way other stuff has a chance of getting seen and not immediately buried. \$\endgroup\$
    – DForck42
    Oct 5, 2017 at 15:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ I've just encountered this issue after discovering that there were only 8 questions with the antimagic-field tag but a ton of questions about antimagic fields. (I assume it was a more recently created tag.) I figured that it'd be worthwhile to add the relevant tag to those questions, but I didn't want to flood the front page with nothing but retags. Glad I wasn't the first to think of this potential problem. \$\endgroup\$
    – V2Blast
    Jul 26, 2018 at 22:04

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
22
\$\begingroup\$

You raise a valid point since there's 132 questions and the vast majority are about to get a named tag.

There's been a couple of ideas about how to do significant retags in the past:

  1. Do like, five or ten a day tops. Keep an eye on the front page and don't do another retag session until the last retag session (yours or anyone else's) has already flowed off the front page.
  2. Do all the editing you can in one session (if there's a limited and reasonable amount to do) so that you limit the front page to being disrupted for just one day. Most users on this day will just check the Newest Questions list instead of the front page to see what questions need attention.

In this case I suggest using method #1. There's 100+ edits to do and we haven't actually made named tags for this category before. It'd be better to take it slow and steady so that errors can be fixed, and potential debate over how to tag these (e.g. whether or not to keep the tag on some/all of them) can be done along the way on meta with time to spare.

\$\endgroup\$
10
  • \$\begingroup\$ What about asking a moderator to make bulk tag changes? \$\endgroup\$
    – okeefe
    Oct 6, 2017 at 14:17
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @okeefe We can do one-to-one renames/replacements of tags, but that's it. We can't do a bulk change to add new tags to questions when it isn't just a complete replacement of an existing tag. :( \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Oct 6, 2017 at 14:27
  • \$\begingroup\$ Honestly, anyone really annoyed [at these frontpage bumps] could just temporarily ignore published-adventures for a while. It is like Spring cleaning. Of course things will be messed up for a while. \$\endgroup\$
    – Mindwin Remember Monica
    Oct 7, 2017 at 14:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ And I am all about keeping the published-adventures on them, and enforcing that they should be so tagged. Then one that don't want any spoils for published adventures can just ignore the umbrella tag. \$\endgroup\$
    – Mindwin Remember Monica
    Oct 7, 2017 at 14:59
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That's unreasonable to ask so not an attitude we ought to take - there's plenty of reason for one to want to see active published adventure questions, and the entire site wants to experience a relatively undisrupted front page, and we don't have a "too bad" attitude for that. \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Oct 7, 2017 at 15:15
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener eh, not the entire site. I don't mind necro edits, really. Honestly, I don't get why people care when a question was posted on any site-- it has no effect on the value of the content nor your ability to respond to it-- so I've no problem with a temporary "disruption" to the active questions page that consists of minor edits to old questions. I respect that most people don't feel that way, though. \$\endgroup\$
    – Please stop being evil
    Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Mindwin That's still a problem though for people who don't frequent meta or don't know how to ignore tags. \$\endgroup\$
    – Rob Rose
    Oct 12, 2017 at 15:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener Arise from the depths of the Stack ye forgotten question, and ..... Seriously, Necromancy is cool. The old questions can use some polishing. If there is a problem with old questions bummping into the front page, then the problem lies with the selector of frontpage stuff to display, not with the diligent work of the lorekeepers that update the library. \$\endgroup\$
    – Mindwin Remember Monica
    Oct 12, 2017 at 19:48
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ #1 is in line with the advice I've seen on Meta.Stackoverflow before; although the volume of traffic there means that you don't have to wait nearly as long between bursts of cleanup to avoid flooding the front page. \$\endgroup\$
    – Dan Is Fiddling By Firelight
    Oct 13, 2017 at 15:24
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @DanNeely Stack Overflow's front page refreshes within half an hour; they've got a whole other world they deal with when it comes to retagging. :) \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Oct 13, 2017 at 15:41
-1
\$\begingroup\$

Another possibility is to not edit the old posts until they pop back to the top organically. As how the community handles locking Game Recommendation Questions. This would give the benefit of not bumping a large number of questions, while still getting the active ones specific tags quickly. This also isn't particularly actionable on anyones part. Simply if you happen to see a [published-adventures] question, tag it.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ This is definitely an option, though probably not one appropriate to a retag like this — there's virtue in having the appropriate questions all tagged appropriately for searchability. \$\endgroup\$
    – doppelgreener
    Oct 12, 2017 at 17:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .