Timeline for When is a question canonical?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
|
|
Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
|
|
Oct 2, 2012 at 16:49 | answer | added | Shog9 | timeline score: 4 | |
Sep 13, 2012 at 0:27 | comment | added | John Gardeniers | @gWaldo, I only came across this one one question and didn't go out looking for other examples, so can't say whether they exist or not. | |
Sep 13, 2012 at 0:13 | comment | added | gWaldo | In re-reading things, is it just that one question that the tag is being called into question, the application of the tag, or the tag in general? We've touched upon all three. | |
Sep 13, 2012 at 0:05 | comment | added | gWaldo | I have no problem with that tag being for mod use only, but is my not being a mod an issue? If changes I (or anyone else) make are determined to be 'for the worst', it can be rolled back. If I (/they) get obnoxious about redoing changes, restrictions/banning happens. | |
Sep 12, 2012 at 23:53 | comment | added | John Gardeniers |
@gWaldo, "without consent" isn't what I was talking about. It was really about whether or not such a question should have the canonical tag. As an aside, I believe only diamonds should be able to apply certain tags, which is already the case for some tags, and personally feel the canonical tag should be on that list. This is because I believe the value of such tags is greatly diminished if not tightly controlled. Some of us have been around long enough to do a fair judgment call but right now I'm not aware of any impediment to a new poster using that tag as they like.
|
|
Sep 12, 2012 at 14:49 | comment | added | gWaldo | @JohnGardeniers From what I read, it seems that you and I are in complete agreement (with several other in support) about the solution, with the main point of contention being some people's dislike of a meta-tag. Is the contention being brought up is that I went ahead and did it without consent? | |
Sep 11, 2012 at 22:49 | comment | added | John Gardeniers | @gWaldo, that is why I wanted other people's input instead of following my first instinct. I really wasn't sure which of us were wrong on this one. | |
Sep 11, 2012 at 19:04 | comment | added | gWaldo | I was attempting to help make useful information more accessible, but if my efforts were unwelcome, nuke as you see fit. Regardless, I still look forward to seeing this information made more accessible. I mean that with every possible sense of honesty and sincerity. | |
Sep 11, 2012 at 19:01 | comment | added | gWaldo | I wish I'd seen that post before doing that work, but as @John Gardeniers pointed out in that thread, without the tag, the only way to discover these questions we consider Canonical is to 1) know about the meta discussion, and then browse it hoping for the topic that you're looking for, and finally clicking on that link. | |
Sep 10, 2012 at 18:43 | comment | added | user9517 Mod | @ChrisS serverfault.com/questions/tagged/canonical | |
Sep 10, 2012 at 13:11 | comment | added | Chris S Mod | Those questions tagged "canonical" are only on Meta.SF. There shouldn't be a "canonical" tag on the main site as it would be a meta-tag. that question is tagged as such because it's discussing canonical Question(s), though it's listed as one as well, something I'm not too hot on. | |
Sep 10, 2012 at 10:20 | vote | accept | John Gardeniers | ||
Sep 10, 2012 at 9:55 | answer | added | sysadmin1138Mod | timeline score: 4 | |
Sep 10, 2012 at 9:55 | comment | added | user9517 Mod | I kind of thought we'd already dealt with this an wish that gWaldo had read meta.serverfault.com/questions/3262/… before embarking on the work he did. That's why we have a question with the canonical answers listed. | |
Sep 10, 2012 at 9:36 | history | asked | John Gardeniers | CC BY-SA 3.0 |