I think that we should not lose sight of the fact that we need to adapt as time marches on. The PHP tag is an angry, bloody mess. I think we also need to be happy that the tag has more or less permanent fixtures in the community that help keep it clean, and support them in their efforts. The question they created is a flare, it's a flare that says we just can't take this constant stream of crap anymore, give us something better to deal with it.

I am also part of that community. PHP is not my primary language, but I have to use it daily.

That being said, this illustrates a problem, people don't read tag wikis - yet doing so would save a lot of people a lot of time and trouble. Putting what they compiled into the tag wiki is like putting it in the attic and leaving a note on the back door to let people know it's there.

Sure, a little duplication is a very good thing because:

• People search for stuff differently
• The context of one question might be more interesting than another, resulting in even more information someone could walk away with
• Searches turn up more results eventually leading the searcher to what we (hope) is a well maintained question

That's the problem, when duplicates come in at the volume that PHP is seeing, we break away from useful and get into downright absurd.

This last attempt was noble, and took quite a bit of time to put together. Is it the answer? No. We can't close against a massive list of possible errors - because we'd then be effectively closing against answers on other questions instead of other specific questions. We're not set up to do that consistently, and the need for it is (while huge to the PHP community) relatively local in the grand scope of things.

That does not, however, excuse us from coming up with a better idea. All we've done to date is put every idea and effort they have come up with under extreme scrutiny, without offering up anything better. We complain when they get badges, we complain when they try to make sure that crap gets enough momentum to close and decay quickly, then we complain when they try to make encyclopedic references.

How much more effort are these people expected to put in? How much do they have to fight for it like C++ did to keep their book list?

We can do better than that, and we should.

I think that we should not lose sight of the fact that we need to adapt as time marches on. The PHP tag is an angry, bloody mess. I think we also need to be happy that the tag has more or less permanent fixtures in the community that help keep it clean, and support them in their efforts. The question they created is a flare, it's a flare that says we just can't take this constant stream of crap anymore, give us something better to deal with it.

I am also part of that community. PHP is not my primary language, but I have to use it daily.

That being said, this illustrates a problem, people don't read tag wikis - yet doing so would save a lot of people a lot of time and trouble. Putting what they compiled into the tag wiki is like putting it in the attic and leaving a note on the back door to let people know it's there.

Sure, a little duplication is a very good thing because:

• People search for stuff differently
• The context of one question might be more interesting than another, resulting in even more information someone could walk away with
• Searches turn up more results eventually leading the searcher to what we (hope) is a well maintained question

That's the problem, when duplicates come in at the volume that PHP is seeing, we break away from useful and get into downright absurd.

This last attempt was noble, and took quite a bit of time to put together. Is it the answer? No. We can't close against a massive list of possible errors - because we'd then be effectively closing against answers on other questions instead of other specific questions. We're not set up to do that consistently, and the need for it is (while huge to the PHP community) relatively local in the grand scope of things.

That does not, however, excuse us from coming up with a better idea. All we've done to date is put every idea and effort they have come up with under extreme scrutiny, without offering up anything better. We complain when they get badges, we complain when they try to make sure that crap gets enough momentum to close and decay quickly, then we complain when they try to make encyclopedic references.

How much more effort are these people expected to put in? How much do they have to fight for it like C++ did to keep their book list?

We can do better than that, and we should.

I think that we should not lose sight of the fact that we need to adapt as time marches on. The PHP tag is an angry, bloody mess. I think we also need to be happy that the tag has more or less permanent fixtures in the community that help keep it clean, and support them in their efforts. The question they created is a flare, it's a flare that says we just can't take this constant stream of crap anymore, give us something better to deal with it.

I am also part of that community. PHP is not my primary language, but I have to use it daily.

That being said, this illustrates a problem, people don't read tag wikis - yet doing so would save a lot of people a lot of time and trouble. Putting what they compiled into the tag wiki is like putting it in the attic and leaving a note on the back door to let people know it's there.

Sure, a little duplication is a very good thing because:

• People search for stuff differently
• The context of one question might be more interesting than another, resulting in even more information someone could walk away with
• Searches turn up more results eventually leading the searcher to what we (hope) is a well maintained question

That's the problem, when duplicates come in at the volume that PHP is seeing, we break away from useful and get into downright absurd.

This last attempt was noble, and took quite a bit of time to put together. Is it the answer? No. We can't close against a massive list of possible errors - because we'd then be effectively closing against answers on other questions instead of other specific questions. We're not set up to do that consistently, and the need for it is (while huge to the PHP community) relatively local in the grand scope of things.

That does not, however, excuse us from coming up with a better idea. All we've done to date is put every idea and effort they have come up with under extreme scrutiny, without offering up anything better. We complain when they get badges, we complain when they try to make sure that crap gets enough momentum to close and decay quickly, then we complain when they try to make encyclopedic references.

How much more effort are these people expected to put in? How much do they have to fight for it like C++ did to keep their book list?

We can do better than that, and we should.

I think that we should not lose sight of the fact that we need to adapt as time marches on. The PHP tag is an angry, bloody mess. I think we also need to be happy that the tag has more or less permanent fixtures in the community that help keep it clean, and support them in their efforts. The question they created is a flare, it's a flare that says we just can't take this constant stream of crap anymore, give us something better to deal with it.

I am also part of that community. PHP is not my primary language, but I have to use it daily.

That being said, this illustrates a problem, people don't read tag wikis - yet doing so would save a lot of people a lot of time and trouble. Putting what they compiled into the tag wiki is like putting it in the attic and leaving a note on the back door to let people know it's there.

Sure, a little duplication is a very good thing because:

• People search for stuff differently
• The context of one question might be more interesting than another, resulting in even more information someone could walk away with
• Searches turn up more results eventually leading the searcher to what we (hope) is a well maintained question

That's the problem, when duplicates come in at the volume that PHP is seeing, we break away from useful and get into downright absurd.

This last attempt was noble, and took quite a bit of time to put together. Is it the answer? No. We can't close against a massive list of possible errors - because we'd then be effectively closing against answers on other questions instead of other specific questions. We're not set up to do that consistently, and the need for it is (while huge to the PHP community) relatively local in the grand scope of things.

That does not, however, excuse us from coming up with a better idea. All we've done to date is put every idea and effort they have come up with under extreme scrutiny, without offering up anything better. We complain when they get badges, we complain when they try to make sure that crap gets enough momentum to close and decay quickly, then we complain when they try to make encyclopedic references.

How much more effort are these people expected to put in? How much do they have to fight for it like C++ did to keep their book list?

We can do better than that, and we should.