# When re-tagging old threads, how many should one do at once?

Sometimes we decide to take care of confusing tags and this involves manual re-tagging. We all agree that one should only start mass re-tagging old threads after it has been discussed & approved on Meta.

There is a broad consensus that one should not re-tag too many threads in one sitting, because all edited threads get pushed to the front page and can become overwhelming or annoying.

I have seen advice (I believe by @gung, @Glen_b, and others) to limit oneself to only a couple of questions (let's say 3-4) at a time. I know patient people (@AndreSilva) who always re-tag only one single question per day. Some others tend to re-tag more. I have recently started to re-tag 10 questions at a time in order to see what people will think about it. I think it's good to discuss it.

What should be the approximate upper number of questions that one should be allowed to re-tag in one sitting?

This assumes that "sittings" are separated by at least half a day. It also assumes that this particular re-tagging action has been discussed & approved.

• Related discussion is in the comments to this answer meta.stats.stackexchange.com/a/1625/28666. – amoeba Aug 27 '16 at 14:32
• I think when I did all the various [fisher*] tags, I did them 5 at a time. – gung Aug 28 '16 at 13:21
• Thanks, @gung. It seems that 5 is currently winning, but I'd like to get more opinions; hopefully more people will vote after the weekend. – amoeba Aug 28 '16 at 14:05
• I don't think it has to be a hard rule. 5 is more of a rule of thumb. I also don't necessarily think waiting half a day needs to be a hard rule. IMO, it's mostly about gaging what won't be disruptive. – gung Aug 28 '16 at 14:14
• @gung, of course; I am only asking about a rule of thumb. – amoeba Aug 28 '16 at 14:16
• Community bumps once an hour. I seldom see him more than four or five times on the front page so five or six hours should clear a batch off that page (if that is what is the concern). – mdewey Aug 28 '16 at 14:40
• (1) It's not just that edited threads are pushed to the front page - e.g. users' favourites lists are affected. (2) There's perhaps an advantage to a batch re-tagging's being recognizable as such, which it isn't if it's too spread out. – Scortchi Aug 28 '16 at 14:49
• @Scortchi I don't think I understand your #1: how are favourites affected? – amoeba Aug 28 '16 at 14:52
• Recently edited posts are highlighted in your favourites list. And you may sort it by activity to see what's new. – Scortchi Aug 28 '16 at 16:09
• Related question: is it better to do it at quiet times on the site, to be less disruptive (I tended to do the kernel tag cleanup late nights in US-Eastern time, after U.S. evening activity wore off and before Europe morning began), or is it actually better to do it during more active times because things are moving anyway and it won't be a huge block? – Dougal Aug 29 '16 at 0:50
• Also, I know nobody here can do anything about it, but an SE feature like meta.stackexchange.com/questions/122567/…, or simply not bumping posts on tag-only edits, would help this drastically. – Dougal Aug 29 '16 at 0:53
• @Dougal, that would be better as a new question (but note this: When is traffic slow on CrossValidated?, eg). – gung Aug 30 '16 at 19:31
• @Dougal I think the idea behind not editing too many questions at once is to maximize the time new questions spend on the front page. From this point of view, slow/quiet times are definitely better. – amoeba Aug 30 '16 at 20:33
• How long is a "time"? – shadowtalker Sep 6 '16 at 0:13
• +1. For me the main drawback of editing lots of posts at a time and bumping them to the active tab, is that it removes attention from new answers and posts with substantial edits. Because new questions will still be visible in the newest tab. (I had missed this post and took a good laugh when I read it :). – Andre Silva Sep 16 '16 at 16:39

Do not re-tag more than 5 old threads at a time.

• So yeah that's why I never completed retagging CNN :( – Franck Dernoncourt Aug 28 '16 at 15:06
• I accept this answer on Sep 5. It has 7 upvotes, no-more-than-ten answer has 2 upvotes (plus my support), and no-limit answer has 6 upvotes. So 10 people prefer limit of five to ten while 6 people prefer no limit at all. – amoeba Sep 5 '16 at 13:08
• Update: it's now 12 vs 6. – amoeba Apr 18 '17 at 11:20

There is no limit. If you have the energy to re-tag 500 threads in one sitting, then thank you & Godspeed.

• No reason for a limit: better tags -> better website. We should be grateful people are willing to do it free of charge. The overhead of having to come back several days or weeks in a row is unnecessary. – Franck Dernoncourt Aug 28 '16 at 15:07
• Agree with this, as long as the community is in agreement beforehand - such as via a meta thread discussion. – Andy W Aug 28 '16 at 19:20
• The problem with this is that people who don't participate in meta or whatever might come to ask a real question and be drowned out in the retagging noise. – Dougal Aug 29 '16 at 0:52
• Unlimited is clearly too much, IMO. 5 is mostly a reasonable, round number that shouldn't be taken too literally. – gung Aug 30 '16 at 19:30
• The core of the issue is that it makes no sense to bump to the front page retagged questions. – Franck Dernoncourt Aug 31 '16 at 1:30
• @FranckDernoncourt SE admins have always said that all edits, however minor, should go to the front page for (potential) community review. But we desperately need more tools for retagging, see meta.stackexchange.com/questions/277076. – amoeba Aug 31 '16 at 1:45

Do not re-tag more than 10 old threads at a time.

• I would upvote this option if I could upvote my own answer. Please count my personal vote in addition. – amoeba Sep 5 '16 at 13:09

Do not re-tag more than 1 old thread at a time.

Do not re-tag more than "a couple" (2-3) old threads at a time.

Do not re-tag more than 25 old threads at a time.

Do not re-tag more than 50 old threads at a time.