Tag mispelling

February 13, 2005 2:18 PM

okay, so I for some reason I keep mispelling veganism. I really don't care about the one in the post, but can the tag be changed?
posted by brevator to Feature Requests at 2:18 PM (12 comments total)

Take an "I" outta that first sentence. sorry.
posted by brevator at 3:37 PM on February 13, 2005

Life is too short to worry about mistagging stuff. You have the option to go back and add the correct tag to the post; and that is the most important thing. Who knows? Perhaps one day someone will make the same typo searching the tags and find exactly what they're after ;)
posted by nthdegx at 5:19 PM on February 13, 2005

Am I missing something? You can't add tags can you?
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:46 PM on February 13, 2005

When I look at the post through my profile it gives me the option of adding tags. However, when I click that link it just brings me to the regular post. To quote CL, am I missing something?
posted by brevator at 5:48 PM on February 13, 2005

Off topic: wouldn't people be more likely to search by "vegan" than "veganism"?
posted by BradNelson at 6:07 PM on February 13, 2005

Now that there's been a substantial number of posts that have been tagged and tags created, might it not be good practice when adding tags to scan the list of most common tags for existing appropriate tags?
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:35 PM on February 13, 2005

You're probably right EB, but that wouldn't have helped me in this case since I misspelled it. Does anyone know how I can add a correctly spelled, existing, appropriate tag?
posted by brevator at 6:43 PM on February 13, 2005

Now that there's been a substantial number of posts that have been tagged and tags created, might it not be good practice when adding tags to scan the list of most common tags for existing appropriate tags?

I disagree fairly strongly, for the sorts of reasons that Stewart from Flickr talks about here. Not that I know if Matt has any plans to surface the tag data usefully in future, or go into any kind of cluster analysis (which would rock, once the data is rich enough, across at least the blue and the green), but it's the long view that interests me.

Hook up MeFi as well into what technorati's doing (an unpopulated example, because I've been busy with other projects lately) and the mind (well, mine at least) starts to go all lucy-in-the-sky-with-geek-diamonds...
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:21 PM on February 13, 2005

Added bonus of leaving it the way it is: If anyone is ever looking for information about vegan Sims, they'll find your post and curse your name. That's gotta be worth something.
posted by kindall at 10:46 PM on February 13, 2005

Bwah kindall.


So I pretty much did what EB suggests after the first furious round of tagging. I went to see what the most popular tag form was for the thing I wanted to describe - god help me, I think it was the presidential election. On the first round, I had tagged something 2004election, but I saw that more people were going with election2004. Since tags are primarily to help other people find stuff, it makes sense to try and keep them consistent, no? And that's not to quash creativity: you can still add whatever freeform bushisanewt-type tag you want.
And I don't really see how Stewart's argument applies here: he's saying there are so many pictures on Flikr that "off' tags don't matter because no one is going to look at 50,000 pix of Italy and therefore won't mind missing the ones only tagged Rome. But here, when searching for a post you know you saw on the election, not being able to find it will be a pain. And even though it may seem like we had 50k election posts, we didn't.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:44 AM on February 14, 2005

You're probably right EB, but that wouldn't have helped me in this case since I misspelled it.

Ahem. Not exactly: You mistyped it.
posted by soyjoy at 7:44 AM on February 14, 2005

Heh.
posted by cortex at 10:35 AM on February 14, 2005