-1

As per our discussion in Creating a new tag for simple questions we want to decide on objective criteria before launching this new tag. What makes a question qualify for the tag Judaism101?

The primary purpose of this tag is to allow interested users to track basic questions.

Some examples of questions that may merit this tag: I am referring to questions about a straight-out halacha (like According to Jewish law, may a women wear men's clothing?), foundations of Jewish belief (how do Jews pray?), and other questions that show minimal background.

Since most of these questions are asked by new users with minimal knowledge of tagging, I want to see if the community can agree on a tag name and criteria for tagging these questions when they show up in the Review panel.

Also looking for alternative names for this tag.

| |
  • 2
    LN6595, I think the consensus at the other post was that this is a Bad Idea and that the community opposes this. I'd recommend against pushing the idea nonetheless. – Double AA Dec 30 '15 at 22:06
  • @DoubleAA I'm not seeing consensus on the other post, just some reasonable concerns to be aware of. – LN6595 Dec 30 '15 at 22:12
  • 2
    The barrage of downvotes (downvotes on meta mean "I don't agree") on your posts should indicate to you that the community is not behind your proposal. – Double AA Dec 30 '15 at 22:13
  • @DoubleAA 4 downvotes+2 up votes does not a barrage of down votes make. – LN6595 Dec 30 '15 at 22:16
  • 4
    But a score of -4 on the proposal for the tag plus a score of +6 on an answer opposing the proposal seems a pretty strong consensus. – Daniel Dec 30 '15 at 22:57
6

As discussed on the prior question, particularly here and here, meta tags of this sort are strongly discouraged on Stack Exchange sites. This blog post explains the problem.

Further, I don't see support so far from the community here to try to change that. The posts that are upvoted are the ones that support the current practice of not using meta tags. It's premature to talk about how to implement something that the community (and SE) is opposed to implementing in the first place.

| |
  • One of the cited problems with meta-tags is that they (at least typically) are inherently subjective. I understand the point of this post to be to determine whether that's the case for this particular proposed tag, to inform the main discussion of whether to adopt the tag. – Isaac Moses Dec 31 '15 at 14:06
  • 1
    @IsaacMoses oh, I see. I read it as "let's nail down the details of this tag we're going to create", as opposed to "what would we have to do to make this tag viable". LN6595, if Isaac's understanding matches your intent, could you clarify that in the question? Thanks. – Monica Cellio Dec 31 '15 at 14:25
-5

A question tagged Judaism 101 should meet the following criteria:

  1. Ask about a foundational Jewish belief or practice (intermarriage, Shabbat, Mitzvot, Kashrut, basic understanding of any of the 13 Ikarim)

And

  1. Have an answer explicitly stated in the Tanach, the Talmud, the Rambam, or Shulchan Aruch.

And

  1. not include Jewish sources or other forms of significant prior research in the question.

And

  1. not be subject to much machlokes

Geirut-Conversion questions should not be tagged with this tag.

| |
  • 1
    2 and 4 would require research into answers before the tag could be applied. So, not only would the asker be presumably incapable of applying the tag (which already breaks the tagging model), even editors would need to do research, essentially enough to write an answer, before applying the tag, which defeats a great deal of the proposed reason for the tag. – Isaac Moses Dec 30 '15 at 21:01
  • @IsaacMoses Let's drop 4. 2 can still be applied to questions that don't require research to know there is a source there (even if I don't have patience to google for the exact source.). I would have said "common knowledge", but that's subjective. – LN6595 Dec 30 '15 at 21:06
  • 3
    Tags should not depend on the answer to the question which rules out 2 and 4. 1 is opinion. 3 just means it's a bad question. – Daniel Dec 30 '15 at 21:09
  • @Daniel 3 is a large portion of questions on our site, very few of which get closed. Generally, bad questions are left open if they show genuine interest. Perhaps we should stick to 3. CreateTag: BadQuestion ; ) – LN6595 Dec 30 '15 at 22:11
  • 1
    Lacking motivation doesn't necessarily make a question closure-worthy. But it can always be improved with a few simple sentences explaining where the question is coming from. I don't really see why we would want a tag just for poorly-fleshed- out questions. – Daniel Dec 30 '15 at 22:17
  • @Daniel I wasn't trying to say that. I meant tag poorly researched questions (often because the OP lacks background knowledge). – LN6595 Dec 30 '15 at 22:18
  • I know what you meant. But a tag that has as one of the criteria for its application being that the question is poorly researched is not a valuable tag. – Daniel Dec 30 '15 at 22:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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