Wikipedia talk:Tagging pages for problems

message: This essay was inspired by a talk-page comment by User:Beland at Talk:Competition law. I look forward to your comments and improvements. THF 02:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks fine to me.  I once answered a help desk question about how many users need to dispute neutrality in an article to put up a POV tag, and I answered: one, as long as it's in good faith. 71.174.240.210 02:34, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Welcome

message: This personal essay contradicts WP:NPOVD and is an invitation for and a justification of drive-by tagging that attempts to excuse the tagger from participating constructively in page editing. Tag graffiti is a significant problem in Wikipedia.  Better to follow the clear policies of NPOVD. Tagging articles is a POV issue. Tagging them and stating "This article is clearly POV" on the talk page is not sufficient, according to NPOVD which requires the productive discussion of specifics. Specifics, not as in, "I specifically said it was POV but I don't have the time to fix it" but more in line of "This sentence: 'blah' is an unsourced statement that is pushing a POV."   ∴ Therefore  talk   03:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The language in this article comes from WP:NPOVD.  Simply driving by and saying it contradicts it is unproductive.  Where is the contradiction?  THF 03:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradicts NPOVD 

message: This article contains some good advice.  But I came here looking for a list of tags, so that I could choose the right one.  I didn't find it.  In fact, there is a link at the bottom that _looks_ like it's a link to the list I want, but returns tags that the software may add, not tags that I'm supposed to consider adding.
Unfortunately, instead of tagging the article I was going to tag, I need to leave and have breakfast.  Thus I fear that this article is "noise" that clouds the "signal" of what helpful editors are really looking for.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krobin (talk • contribs) 00:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly unhelpful: needs a link to the tag list 

message: I do acknowledge tagging is fundamental in development of high-quality articles and certainly helps display the problems explicitly to uninvolved readers. However, I do believe that we need a more clearer policy on tagging and agree with the above user on this. It is really unhelpful if the tagger doesnt spend time explain the rationale and instead insist on tagging even if the author or authors of the article are willing to work with him or her. The distinction between un-oppsed drive-by tagging and cases where authors willing to work with the tagger needs to be made. Docku:“what up?” 18:02, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, the expression "drive-by tagging" is problematic, as it appears to invoke a comparison to drive-by shooting. Secondly, there is no requirement in Wikipedia policies that an editor must "pay their dues" by working on an article before they can add a tag, so long as they explain the rationale for the tag on the talk page.OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 12:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  drive-by tagging 

message: The practice of tagging in the article space should be proscribed on a basis of WP:V (see threshold for inclusion).  Tagging constitutes meta-commentary about the current state of the article and therefore comprises talk content, not article content.  Problems related to an article should be discussed on an article's talk page, not made to blight an article.  Further, tagging should not be considered an acceptable substitute to editing the article or discussing article problems. Robert K S (talk) 18:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging contradicts [[WP:V]] 

message: I just ran across this essay and find the information important and deserving of community support. I sometimes place a tag on an article I run across in the course of other work. I do not troll to place tags and in fact have taken the position that unaddressed tags or long term tags should be removed. If there are issues and nothing is done then nothing can be fixed. I feel tags are necessary but should be accompanied by comments as to what led an editor to place the tag when the template is not clear. It certainly would be unreasonable to expect an editor to place a talk page comment on reasons for a tag that there are no references on an article. It is hard to even imagine stopping in the middle of work or research to address a problem that has come to light. Placing a tag not only calls attention to a problem it places the article on my watch list and I go over this from time to time. This means to me that tags do have an importance but there is also a need for an essay or guideline, especially important for newer users, to explain a community consensus on use. Otr500 (talk) 14:53, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging for future work 

message: What would it take to get this essay (or some variation of it) turned into a guideline? (See WP:VPP proposal here.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotion to guideline 

message: Requesting a second opinion about whether Guthy-Renker warrants a tag (see discussion here). I brought the page up to GA while following COI best practices. In support of the tag, an editor says it's promotional to identify the article-subject by name in the article too frequently - I disagree. etc. Would appreciate someone taking a look. CorporateM (Talk) 20:03, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second opinion 

message: I know I am not the only Wikipedian who finds it incomprehensible and maddening that there doesn't seem to be a complete list of Wikipedia tags.  If there is, where is it, and why doesn't this help page link to it?  If there isn't, why doesn't someone create one?  (Don't tell me to do it, I don't know nearly enough about them.)  I bet that if someone created such a list, it would immediately become one of the most frequently consulted Wikipedia help pages. Littlewindow (talk) 23:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no list of tags? 

message: Related discussion on promoting the essay WP:TAGGING to Guideline status.
* Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Promote_WP:Tagging_pages_for_problems_to_guideline
009o9Disclosure(Talk) 15:56, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am going to ask you to stop editing this document directly.  If I need an RfC to get you to stop doing that, I will do.  If it is not obvious why I am asking you to not editing this document directly, please ask. Jytdog (talk) 21:03, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If you didn't get the hint, I am asking you not to edit this essay while it is in policy discussions. Changing the content while it is being voted on is unacceptable. 009o9Disclosure(Talk) 01:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I made one change here at  20:13, 20 May 2016 and a second change here saying the same thing at 00:25, 21 May 2016.  There was only one plus !vote before then, and I have notified that person; the changes would not have affected the oppose !vote but I have notified them anyway. I have no intention of making further changes. You work as a paid editor and it looks very bad for you to be arguing against a change that affects your paid editing.  Just knock it off.  Jytdog (talk) 01:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  New related discussion at Village Pump 

message: Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Template messages#Can you update the date? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can you update the date? 

message: An RfC is underway that interested "watchers of this page" wound enhance by participating, I hope that many will! The discussion is located at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle#RfC regarding "Ambox generated" maintenance tags that recommend the inclusion of additional sources. Thank you.--John Cline (talk) 06:17, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC of potential interest 

message: This essay contains lots of info about when to tag a page, but not how to do it. 
I'm trying to do something fairly straightforward. I've found a very confusing Wikipedia page on Ata-Malik Juvayni. It contains no footnotes, but has five 'references' at the bottom numbered 1-5 as though there were footnotes in the text using those numbers.
In addition, these references seem to have nothing at all to do with the article. It is about a Persian historian, and they are about a Chinese general.
I know NOTHING about the topic myself, so can't even begin to fix it. I want to tag the page so that other editors are alerted to the problem. But the Wikipedia help pages direct me here, and this essay is not in any way helpful for the editor who simply wants to know HOW to do this as opposed to why and when it might be advisable to do so.
I would appreciate it if someone could  help with this please. Liamcalling (talk) 02:12, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The page isn't intended as a "how-to" guide. It includes links to Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup in three different places, and Wikipedia:Template messages once. Try those. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 11:23, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  HOW do you tag a page? 

message: Yesterday I stumbled upon an article that was loaded with ideological sounding language, presented as objective fact. It was vague and weaselly, and almost none of it was sourced. This is the article in question: History of capitalism. I wrought the most havoc in the "Varieties of Capitalism" section. I enthusiastically tagged every vaguery, weasel wording and lack of sources I could find, and did some constructive edits to the text itself too, however on this article I read that I'm not supposed to do that, that you should never use more than 2 or 3 tags on a single article. My question is then, what else am I supposed to do when people write articles like that? Should I just delete the text I don't like? I can't use the "this section uses no citations" (or whatever) thing, because sometimes they do use 1 source in that section, and I frankly don't have the time to edit long texts about topics I'm not that invested in myself, plus I'm not a very good writer or a very motivated one, yet sometimes I do see content that's bad and I wanna do something about it. Should I just turn the disputed text into a comment in the source code so it's out of sight but not gone? Dapperedavid (talk) 13:43, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many tags? 

message: I assume tag means cleanup tags and maintenance tags. Are CSD/PROD/XFD tags included? I think ideally we would explain exactly what tags we mean in the lead, and/or wikilink the word "tag" to something. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is a tag exactly? 

message: I came to this page hoping to find what tag to use to suggest a page/section needs to be cleaned up for better grammar/English. Perhaps this page itself could be improved to help people find the tags they need to use. Rebroad (talk) 11:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , maybe use  for the article,  for the section, and  for inline. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging for poor English