8
$\begingroup$

When I was checking what appeared among newly created tags, I've noticed . It was probably created here.

This tag seems perhaps somewhat similar to , see the discussion here: Would a tag for “check-my-proof” questions be useful? I probably should have be more general and not restrict that question only to proofs.

I would like to know what other MSE users think about this tag.

  • What do you think? Will this tag be useful? Should we keep it?

Let me also say that I personally consider this tag useful and I am posting this also to make more users aware of this tag. (The response to another question - which was in a similar spirit, but where I was asking only about proofs - suggests that there are other users which might consider this tag useful, too.)

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I feel like we've had this conversation before. I feel that we concluded that the tag is useless. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Apr 5 '13 at 9:17
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Keep. It is the ultimate in showing what you tried, and it is logical to assume that people interested in that aspect of questions would find the tag useful for concentrating their help on the most "deserving". Also useful for people who don't like to answer when the OP essentially knows how to solve the problem. Useful as a warning that tedious work may be involved. $\endgroup$ – zyx Apr 5 '13 at 9:49
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @zyx: It's a useless meta tag. Often the answer to these questions would be "Yes."; it is much more favorable to write a question and post your own answer (which now is possible to do immediately), and let others critique the answer. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Apr 5 '13 at 10:55
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @Asaf: I wouldn't call it a useless meta-tag. Even if such questions were always posted in the manner you set out, the tag could give an indication to others that the entire content of the question is not restricted to the question box alone. $\endgroup$ – user642796 Apr 5 '13 at 14:17
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila, another possiblity is a check-my-proof sandbox thread where each one is an answer. $\endgroup$ – zyx Apr 5 '13 at 18:44
  • $\begingroup$ @zyx: That sounds a bit tedious, but possible. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Apr 5 '13 at 19:12
  • $\begingroup$ @zyx: I like that idea actually better than people posting and answering their own question. Furthermore, I think the answer given by others will almost never be a simple "Yes". Obviously, the asker has difficulty understanding the concepts involved, otherwise he would be sure of his answer. Some intuition into why his answer is indeed correct can be very helpful. Especially if the asker only provides a direct answer, without motivation.. He might have the answer right, but for the completely wrong reasons.. $\endgroup$ – Mythio Apr 12 '13 at 7:43
8
$\begingroup$

Note that "proof-writing" is often abused, because it is for questions how to write a proof, not about a special thing that someone shall prove.

As Asaf Karagila mentioned in a comment it would be much better, if they ask their question and write an answer on their own, and the others would comment mistakes and errors on the answer.

This has a lot of benefits, because

  • solution-verification is no category of problems, it doesn't help anyone to find a special question, so the sense of a tag is not fulfilled.
  • The asker will get much more reputation, as he will get upvotes for the question, and the answer (when it is right, or at least a nice try)
  • short answer like yes are avoided.
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure that I agree on what you call the abuse of proof-writing tag. The tag-wiki mentions as one example of usage of this tag: "Here is a proof about [x-mathematical idea]. How can it be improved?" $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Apr 9 '13 at 12:15
  • $\begingroup$ Well as I unterstand the tag-wiki it is for "I already have proof that is right, but I want to improve it". So for example questions like "The intermediate steps in my proof are very long, shall I make a lemma for that ?" would fit in the proof-writing tag as i unterstand it $\endgroup$ – Dominic Michaelis Apr 9 '13 at 12:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Judging from the upvotes to this answer (and to Asaf's comment, which the answer reflects) I guess that I am not the only one, who understands the proof-writing tag as an appropriate tag for "check-my-proof" type of questions. (And I have used the tag in this way.) But when I read the tag-wiki now, it seems to be closer to your interpretation. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Apr 9 '13 at 12:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Not all solutions that might need (solution-verification) are proofs. $\endgroup$ – zyx Apr 9 '13 at 18:32
  • $\begingroup$ I agree with zyx, what if it's a computational problem? And if a major portion of the proof is wrong, then you don't have short "yes" answers. This is probably more likely since the OP is unsure with her/his proof to begin with. $\endgroup$ – AlanH Apr 11 '13 at 20:22
2
$\begingroup$

There is already one answer which says this tag is not useful. I am going to post an answer with the contrary position, so that people can upvote/downvote to show their opinion. (I wrote in my question that I think that such tag could be useful, but it is not entirely clear whether upvotes on the question mean: +1 I agree or +1 this is worth bringing up. So putting this here as an answer makes the meaning of upvotes and downvotes clearer.)

I am making this CW, if you see some other possible reasons, why this tag would be useful, feel free to ad them to the post.

The tag can be useful for several reasons:

  • It is one of possible indicators that the OP has done at least something and it is not just a copy-paste homework question.
  • People who are unwilling to check and critique solutions from other people (because they find it tedious or for whatever reason) can simply ignore this tag.
  • People who want to do this can favorite/follow this tag.

These are basically the same points as zyx mentions in his comment. AlanH mentioned usefulness of this tag as an indicator of research effort in his answer, too; but for some reason he decided to delete it.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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