I just tried to edit this question about editing etiquette. Well, I could easily enter the editing page, do my edits and check with the preview that everything was OK. But on submission I got the message

Oops! Your edit couldn't be submitted because: 'discussion faq etiquette editing' contains a tag reserved for moderator use

This is somewhat annoying: Why didn't the system tell me in advance, when I hit the edit link, that I can't edit the post anyway? It would be very nice if this could be implemented. By the way, this was already the second time that it happened to me; the first time was when I tried to edit this question after the tag had been added.

So much for the feature-request, let me add the question: For the question about editing etiquette, do you think it's OK that only moderators can edit it? I think yes, since this is really an important faq entry and not a question.

2 Answers 2


I can see the logic in questions being only editable by moderators, but I think that the locking being done by a tag is a bit low-key! It should be obvious to all (and I didn't know about it until just now) that this is the case, and so the procedure for getting edits in to the entry more formalised.

  • I agree, but what can be done? Commented Jan 15, 2011 at 9:51
  • 1
    @Hendrik: Firstly, which tags are moderator-only? Secondly, avoid these tags unless absolutely necessary. Thirdly, if one of these tags must be used, the question should explicitly say that the question can't be edited by a non-moderator and that any suggestions of changes should be made in the answers/comments. Commented Jan 15, 2011 at 21:22
  • @Hendrik: It just occurred to me: what if you edit the question and then remove the problematic tag? Commented Jan 15, 2011 at 21:23
  • @Andrew: Ah, writing in the actual question that the tag prevents deletion is a nice "workaround". Good idea! But we don't want to avoid tags like "faq" and "featured", do we? And we can't possible avoid the "status-..." tags, so your "Secondly" doesn't seem to work. Concerning your other comment, I don't dare test it as I can't put the tag back in, but you might also want to look at my question over at meta.SO; maybe you understand better what they're saying there. Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 14:14
  • 1
    @Hendrik: Well, maybe we avoid the tag "faq" until people are happy with it. The intention of that question was for people to be able to edit the question until a consensus was arrived at, then for it to become an unofficial faq entry. Because of the tag behaviour, tagging it "faq" should have happened last instead of first. Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 19:02
  • @Andrew: I quite agree. Although for that particular question I'd say that the stage "consensus" was already there. Or do you mean: It would have been quite OK for me to remove it; it can easily be reintroduced? Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 19:05
  • @Hendrik: I've just changed the tag from "faq" to "faq-provisional". It may be that that question is now stable, but there's also the precedent to consider. Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 19:08
  • @Hendrik: PS if you could remove the tag (and I think you should do the experiment - now with another post of course) then that makes the locking a bit ludicrous. Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 19:09
  • @Andrew: OK, I did the experiment. No way, I can't remove the tag, with or without modifying the answer. Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 19:17
  • @Hendrik: then it makes sense to initially tag these as, say, "faq-provisional". Then to tag them as "faq" when they're stable, and finally if someone comes along later with a suggestion, they should flag for moderator attention. Commented Jan 16, 2011 at 19:59
  • @Andrew: Now you can reverse the "faq-provisional" of that question to "faq". Commented Jan 18, 2011 at 9:01

Jeff just left the tag. I tested what it means: It means that, for example, I can edit my above question although it carries the tag. Great!

You must log in to answer this question.

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