Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
What should we do about tagging in Site Proposals?
We need to figure out tags in the "Site Proposals" category. I noticed that some proposals were tagged "suggestion" and some "new-communities" and started to replace the former with the latter, and then I stopped and said "wait, everything here is a suggestion for a new community!".
For technical reasons we need to have some tag right now, but what should the tag(s) there be? Adding a tag for launched communities makes sense, and maybe one for proposals we've agreed we're not going to do, but that doesn't help with the initial tagging.
Or maybe everything is a status-something tag -- proposals start at status-proposed, and then we might retag to status-something-else as it moves through the process?
Ideas?
Superseded by the new Proposals site.
I can't close this question as superseded, maybe because the target is an article or maybe because it's in a different category.
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
It's a little awkward using a Q&A engine for site proposals at all, really, at least not without some more guidance, as not only the tagging is unclear, but what exactly goes in the "questions" and what goes in the "answers" needs some direction and refinement, and what is required before a site gets "accepted".
But for tagging specifically (let's solve one problem at a time, I suppose), I like your suggestion to have a required status-* tag for everything.
Here's a rough list off the top of my head, please pick it apart and take only what makes sense:
- status-proposed
- status-shortlist or status-refinement or something. (Not sure what to call this, but when it's "yeah, that's a good idea, and will probably get implemented, we just need to nail down some specifics like on-topic scope, what if anything to import, who is moderating, that kind of thing.")
- status-needs-to-find-more-users
- status-declined
- status-accepted (Yes we will, we just haven't yet)
- status-beta (maybe not needed right now as everything is beta-ish, but we may want to distinguish at some point between beta sites and "completed" sites?)
- status-completed
In terms of other tagging, we might want to also group proposals by type in some other way, like technical, recreation, science, etc.
This answer builds on Peter's answer (thanks!).
I think we need to approach tags along two axes. One is tracking status of proposals, as suggested by Peter. We did this informally when I added "status-launched" to the Photography post, but we can and should track status through earlier stages too.
The other axis is proposals versus ideas. We've been getting both types of suggestions. Proposals are more fully worked out; ideas are more like "can we have a site about X?". Ideas aren't ready to move forward yet because we need to find out if there's a community behind them -- but how do we find out if there's already a community here if not through a post? So I suggest having two tags, "ideas" and "proposals", with a requirement to use one or the other. Ideas can gather support and be refined into proposals, and people can more easily see what stage each suggestion is in.
0 comment threads