The tag on Cross Validated doesn't seem to have any usage guidelines included.

An analogous tag "reference-request" on Math.StackExchange has the guideline that it should not be a standalone tag, i.e. the only tag used for a question. There are also explicit guidelines for other meta-tags: https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2498/the-meta-tags

Would it make sense to have similar guidelines for Cross Validated? Or do such guidelines already exist (and I couldn't find them) but they are not written in the tag info for "references"?

I was looking for tags without any tag info or usage guidelines to edit and "references" came to mind as one thing to consider. Changes without consulting Meta usually are not approved.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ [References] does have a wiki excerpt, it says ""References" is our generic tag for questions seeking information about books, papers, presentations, videos of lectures, on-line tutorials, etc., regarding any subject matter that is on-topic for Cross Validated.". Are you saying that we should add 1 sentence saying that this tag should not be used on its own? $\endgroup$ – amoeba Apr 16 '17 at 11:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @amoeba I guess, or anything else like that. I'm not quite sure, since I haven't been active on CV very long. $\endgroup$ – Chill2Macht Apr 16 '17 at 12:17
  • $\begingroup$ @AndreSilva this looks like what I was looking for -- I'll take a look $\endgroup$ – Chill2Macht Apr 16 '17 at 18:39
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I changed the wiki excerpt to "Questions seeking external references (books, papers, etc.) about a particular subject. Always use a more specific tag in addition." $\endgroup$ – amoeba Apr 16 '17 at 21:18

About :

I included a link to the most upvoted answer in Should all "book recommendation" questions be classified as community wiki? in the tag wiki as additional guidance.

@amoeba edited the tag excerpt to also advise using specific tags:

Questions seeking external references (books, papers, etc.) about a particular subject. Always use a more specific tag in addition.

About the general question:

Should we have usage guidelines for meta-tags?

Generally speaking, meta tags should be avoided, but sometimes the community decides there can be exceptions, such as . In such cases, it is always good to have guidance about using these tags.

  • $\begingroup$ +1. By the way, I am somewhat confused by the thread stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1593: it has an accepted answer but I am not sure if that answer answers Yes or No to the title question. Is it a Yes, or is it a No? $\endgroup$ – amoeba Apr 18 '17 at 19:06
  • $\begingroup$ What confused me is that I could not find an answer to the title question. Now I see that it's Yes; I must have overlooked it. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – amoeba Apr 18 '17 at 19:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I did edit that answer now - see if you think it makes sense. $\endgroup$ – amoeba Apr 18 '17 at 19:59

You must log in to answer this question.

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