Please align the Excel tags isn't agreed upon, while Can we please standardize the Microsoft tags? has been there for ages and has been a consensus which we pretty much agreed up.

  1. Why does a moderator perform changes put forward by someone that is not properly using tags?

  2. Why does a moderator let the community discuss in which way we should have the tags?

The question Can we please standardize the Microsoft tags? has been seen by both the questioner as it shows up forth, as well as by a moderator. Can the moderator team please elaborate on the reasoning behind all this? Because nobody has (dis)agreed over Please align the Excel tags...

  • 3
    A downvote on this topic means what, exactly? "No, we don't want moderators to explain why they do things the way they do?"
    – Daniel Beck Mod
    Jun 25, 2011 at 14:42
  • 1
    I also can't really see why you'd downvote that. Tom is asking for reasons why changes are made without community agreement first (especially if there has been contradictory community agreement before).
    – slhck
    Jun 25, 2011 at 16:41
  • 4
    I generally don't like posts that single other people out by name. The concept can be generalized. (I did not downvote, but that is a reason why I would..) Jun 26, 2011 at 7:18
  • @JeffAtwood: The problem is that if I don't come up with the example, this question would have no sense at all. Or should I have mailed instead? Although I don't like talking behinds people's back. If someone does something, he either does have a reason for it which he can choose to explain (well, in the sense of a community doing actions without reasoning or agreement feels wrong), if he doesn't have a reason for it and it's a mere accident he could choose to agree (and forgive). I don't want to put @random in a bad daylight which is why he is only listed inside the OL, just my two cents... Jun 26, 2011 at 13:00
  • @tom "And not only ignorance by the questioneer, but also ignorance from Random" is really not appropriate IMO. Jun 26, 2011 at 13:01
  • @JeffAtwood: Agreed. Well, if he didn't see the other question it would have been fine with me and this question wouldn't even exist, but if there has been contradictory community agreement before that ♦ has taken part in I don't see the point why this action has been performed now. So, I do have the need to list it. I probably was a bit upset at that point. It's a good point that referring to a single person is bad, I'll try to avoid it next time (which I hope there won't be)... Jun 26, 2011 at 13:11

1 Answer 1


Was deferring to the actual product names and not an extra branding prefix.

In this case, the Excel spreadsheet program is known and sold as Excel YYYY.

Yes, it is made by Microsoft, but adding in the branding makes the tag needlessly long and busy.

  • You aren't answering the question at all, I'm asking for the reasoning behind applying these changes without agreement: Where have we agreed upon removing branding prefixes? Why introduce an inconsistency with tags like microsoft-outlook and microsoft-word which we obviously can't name outlook and word? Why is the length a real problem other than in the sense of OCD, there always is going to be word wrapping in a limited width anyway, try visiting the mobile version as there is no point in decreasing the length? Why did you apply this without agreement? Jun 24, 2011 at 23:08
  • Furthermore, the model name is Excel YYYY but the actual product name is Microsoft Excel YYYY, this is what both IceCat and Wikipedia confirm. Although this is relevant, as the outlook and word don't fit... Jun 24, 2011 at 23:15
  • 4
    @Tom I think it is important to remember that random is our ally in this and has the same goals as we all do -- making our little corner of the Internet a little bit better. I know we've all contributed a lot of time working toward that, and random in particular has gone far above the call of duty for years now. Jun 26, 2011 at 14:00

You must log in to answer this question.

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