I proposed this excerpt for the tag:

Led Zeppelin was a Rock band formed in 1968 by Jimmy Page, Robert Plant, John Paul Jones and John Bonham.

I think if you're tagging a band, you pretty much know about them but I thought that was a nice, compact description.

It was rejected.

So, what type of information is necessary in a band's excerpt? I mean, on Stack Overflow I get that PHP and Perl and such need an explanation, but I think on a music fans site it's clear when you should tag Led Zeppelin. Should the excerpt just be:

"If your question is about Led Zeppelin, use this tag."?

  • I don't see anything wrong with that description. It's a good base start, and could be fleshed out by the community as time goes on. Feb 26, 2015 at 23:46
  • The actual description was a little more indepth, that was just the excerpt. None of it was plageurized, I wrote it off the top of my head. You may be able to see everything if you look at the history of the tag. I know I can, but that may be just because I was the editor. I just want to know what they're looking for so I can get back to editing, there's no sense in doing it if they're all going to get rejected. Feb 26, 2015 at 23:55
  • I agree that the use of the tag is obvious, and that the excerpt needn't call it out. But, do we need tag wikis for such things at all? If someone doesn't know about Led Zeppelin then the Wikipedia article is going to be better than our two-liner. Feb 27, 2015 at 1:51
  • I would say date of formation, country, and members (at least principal members if they changed too much).
    – Bebs
    Nov 30, 2016 at 11:20

3 Answers 3


I actually believe this is a good except. I can't understand why it was rejected.

It's brief and to the point. It actually gives the basic info for Led Zeppelin.

I think this is what band wiki excerpts should look like.


Tag excerpts are the popups that tells users when to use a particular tag, but when new sites start writing their wiki excerpts, we'll often end up with something like this.

a method of exchanging digital messages from an author to one or more recipients

That's not very helpful.

In our [tag] system, we have "tag wikis" and we have "tag wiki excerpts." A Tag Wiki is a free form wiki page that allows the community to create collaborative resource about the subject. It may also contain a list of resources of interest to folks in that subject space. A Tag Wiki Excerpt is a short summary that pops up when users are picking tags for their question. It describes when a tag should be used.

Most Common Problems:

Excerpts should describe usage, not definitions

See What should a tag wiki excerpt contain?

Tag Wiki Excerpts are not typically simple dictionary definitions of what a word means. Wiki Excerpts should contain usage guidance for when the tag should be used. It may sound a bit silly or redundant to describe the 'led-zeppelin' tag as something to be used when you have question about the band, their music, legacy, music style or history… but when you have more subtle tags that need more guidance, users are not going to know what tag excerpts are for.

Exceptions to the rule:

Sometimes the subject of a tag is so obscure, it really needs the entire space of the tag wiki just to describe what it is. Also, if a tag is an acronym, sometimes it is useful just to clarify what that acronym stands for. (e.g. For questions about the organization, "the American Society of Composers, Authors & Publishers", and their influence and dealings in the music industry. (oops, I actually got some guidance in there there))

Copied Content

Tag wikis can become a valuable resource to this community. But too often, folks hear wiki, and they simply copy the content of Wikipedia over to this site. While perfectly legal, that is not what tag wikis are for. Tag wikis are designed to create an original and valuable resource for this community specifically. So hypothetically, something like this should be rejected:

![enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TWa19.png)

REJECTED — This edit copies a significant amount of content from an external source. Generic descriptions such as encyclopedia articles and ad copy do not provide useful guidance; try creating something useful to this community specifically, and be sure to attribute the original author. See: How to reference material written by others.

I hope you find that helpful.

  • 1
    Interesting Wiki entry, because as God is my witness I wrote both the Excerpt and body from my own knowledge. Although what you have above isn't my entry, it's really close. I guess the excerpt needs to be something like "Used for all questions regarding the band", and the body can expand on who the band was, when they were active, etc..? Feb 27, 2015 at 15:54
  • 1
    What would you suggest would be a good tag wiki excerpt for the "led-zeppelin" tag?
    – Ben Miller
    Feb 27, 2015 at 21:48

I agree that a one-sentence description of the band with the time period, genre, and the notable members would make the most sense for the band tag excerpts.

What I would love to see is that when you are looking at the Tags page, it would be obvious from looking at the excerpts if the tag is a band name or not. With tags like or , everyone probably knows that they are band names. However, band names can be anything. What about tags like , , , or ? Are those band names, or something else? As the site ages and more band tags are added, there will undoubtedly be tags added for bands I've never heard of. It would be nice to see something in the excerpts signifying that the tag is a band name.

A one-sentence excerpt as suggested in the OP sounds ideal to me, but at the very least, it should be something like:

Questions about the band.

Or perhaps just a single word excerpt:


  • 1
    I'm not sure if you can see the rejected excerpt, but the rejection states, "Excerpts should describe why and when a tag should be used." Part of my question (whether it's evident or not) is that when it comes to a band, it should be pretty clear why and when you use the tag, otherwise the excerpt is gonna be really generic for every band tag. As in your answer, I fear that the last sentence will be used for every tag, and that's probably not the best idea. Feb 27, 2015 at 1:52
  • 1
    It might be simpler to go the reverse direction and leave band names as is, but change trap to trap-genre and so on. Feb 27, 2015 at 1:52
  • @MatthewRead My point with listing those tags are that anything could be a band name. If you change "trap" to "trap-genre" (which I wouldn't necessarily agree with), it fixes only one instance of possible confusion.
    – Ben Miller
    Feb 27, 2015 at 1:56
  • @JohnnyBones I agree with you that it would be better to see a customized one-sentence excerpt for each band, but in my opinion, a standard "Questions about the band" excerpt would be preferable to nothing. I guess we'll need some direction from Robert Cartaino on what he's looking for there.
    – Ben Miller
    Feb 27, 2015 at 2:00
  • Whoops, misread a bit. Yes, I agree that tag wiki excerpts are the best solution and that we should stay on top of them. Feb 27, 2015 at 2:03
  • Possibly do like most bands do on FB or even their URL; add the word "band" at the end. So, led-zeppelin-band, trap-band, the-who-band, etc... I guess in some cases, like Steve Miller Band, you don't really need it, but that's where tag editors will come into play. Feb 27, 2015 at 15:23
  • @JohnnyBones I'd rather see it in the excerpt than in the tag name.
    – Ben Miller
    Feb 27, 2015 at 15:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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