Someone suggested an edit to remove the tag with the reason:

ruby != RoR

I was tempted to reject the edit, since is a valid tag in my opinion for . The user is a good contributor in the tag on SO so I was doubtful what would be the best option here.

Do we reject edit like that or are we separating Ruby and RoR?

Here is a rejected similar edit and here is an accepted one.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Sounds like the same type of person that would remove the JavaScript tag from a jQuery question. \$\endgroup\$ – MonkeyZeus Feb 26 '16 at 14:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ With all due respect to the users who accepted the last mentioned edit, I've rolled it back. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast Sep 11 '16 at 15:41

Editing out from is basically equivalent to editing out or from questions (containing code in the relevant language).

In short… it's a stupid idea.

Please reject such edits as vandalism / non-improvement.

A question concerning RoR code can be reviewed by people, whether they know RoR or not. It's just that RoR people may have better insight into the framework. In the end it's still Ruby code and should be tagged accordingly.

  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ That what my first impression was but I wanted confirmation that what we wanted here. \$\endgroup\$ – Marc-Andre Feb 24 '16 at 2:02

In short, our rule is that every question must have a language tag. There may be other tags which are redundant or more specific (e.g. or ), but the language tag is still required.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Is ruby-on-rails considered a framework tag and not a language tag then? If so perhaps it's worth adding that Ruby should also be tagged in the ruby-on-rails tag excerpt. \$\endgroup\$ – SuperBiasedMan Feb 24 '16 at 9:27
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @SuperBiasedMan I agree, taking a look at the tags it's pretty clear one is a language and one is a framework, but it would be a good idea to put that in the excerpt for ROR. \$\endgroup\$ – Raystafarian Feb 24 '16 at 9:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ Please, see my answer below and comment smth there or in the chatroom chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/8595/the-2nd-monitor \$\endgroup\$ – Nakilon Sep 11 '16 at 17:43

This is one area where the community stance is fairly unanimous. The language tag is the most important. In fact, all questions on Code Review have the language tag.

In fairness, the thought behind the perpetrator is likely that it is a more specific subcategory and implies the derived tag. Perhaps they desired an additional tag but five tags is more than sufficient.

Once you consider the actual way tags are used the mistake becomes obvious. Say there are people who are interested in Ruby in general, and follow the tag. If we allowed this, these would be helpful people are then no longer able to color-distinguish, search or filter and find the post.


The problem about Ruby/Rails tags is that 90% of these questions are really so much about Rails that:

  1. If you throw out the part of code that is Rails-related, there would be nothing left to review
  2. The guy who is interested in Ruby language related questions has nothing to say

I've asked the same question on meta.stackexchange already six years ago and it was decided to omit the Ruby tag, so I assumed it should be the same logic here. If you follow the links there you'll see another answers accepted in the same way:

  • \$\begingroup\$ As long as Rails is still written in the Ruby language, it should carry the Ruby tag. Do you contest this? \$\endgroup\$ – Mast Sep 11 '16 at 17:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mast, yes I do. Just repeating the obvious relation of one tag to another one isn't an argument. \$\endgroup\$ – Nakilon Sep 11 '16 at 17:52
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ That goes against the nature of how Code Review works. We will not make an exception for Ruby. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast Sep 11 '16 at 17:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ The page you are commenting on right now is exactly to clarify what it "the nature". Saying "it's wrong because it's wrong" is wrong. \$\endgroup\$ – Nakilon Sep 11 '16 at 17:55
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ And don't omit applicable tags to shield readers from subjects they're not interested in: you can easily craft a search to exclude tags you aren't personally interested in. - I find that this goes against your idea of removing the Ruby tag from RoR questions. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Sep 11 '16 at 18:21
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Here is one question that contains some Ruby code as background information, but the code that is intended for review is actually an ERb template, which only marginally qualifies as "Ruby". I'm OK with leaving out the ruby tag for that exceptional case. Most Rails questions are written in Ruby, though, and our convention is to have a language tag on every question; ruby-on-rails is merely the name of the framework. I'd rather not drop the python tag from django questions, etc. \$\endgroup\$ – 200_success Sep 12 '16 at 6:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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