A couple weeks ago I spent some time to add wiki tags summaries for many void tags. Some of them were accepted (thank you), but some are rejected.
Please explain what I did wrong, so I could not make the same errors again.
These tags are eg. jews (https://history.stackexchange.com/posts/9068/revisions), everyday-life (https://history.stackexchange.com/posts/9053/revisions), tanks (https://history.stackexchange.com/posts/9088/revisions).
I'm very glad that you asked this - I reviewed your tag summaries and approved about half of them. I wanted to leave feedback for the ones I rejected, but I didn't know how to do so, and then I got distracted by tasks for which people pay me.
If there was a pattern to the rejections it was because I felt there was a dangerous ambiguity in the text. Unfortunately enough time has gone by that I don't remember the details, but I remember looking at one of the texts and thinking, "I can see what he meant to say, but I'm not sure that it says that." I remember thinking that it was the kind of sentence that I could see myself writing, and then being pilloried for not spotting the ambiguity. I really wished I could have offered an constructive suggestion or edit rather than a rejection. As I said, I meant to go back and try to fix that, but got distracted by a shiny paycheck.
Tags are constrained to be very brief, and sometimes that brevity seems to facilitate misunderstanding. When the subject is contentious, any misunderstanding can lead to the kind of fractious debate that undermines SE. I wish I could remember the details, but I do recall rejecting your first attempt at a summary tag for Jews, and then approving the second because it was much clearer.
In any case I'm glad you asked for the feedback - the site doesn't offer the chance to offer feedback on tag wiki content. In every case I appreciated that you'd drafted the tag, and liked most of what I saw. I only rejected when I saw something that was unintentionally substantively misleading, or that might generate unpleasant arguments.
It could just be a matter of who happened to come across your tag wiki edits.
I have about the most permissive attitude toward tag wiki edits you are liable to find (IMHO just about any wiki is better than no wiki). So if the old wiki was blank and you luck out and get me to look at it first, you are quite likely to get your edits accepted.
OTOH, you could have bad luck and get a moderator with some standards. :-)
https://history.stackexchange.com/posts/9068/revisions has classic "Who is a Jew?" problems.
https://history.stackexchange.com/posts/9053/revisions is grossly out of line with the technical meaning of "everyday life" in historiography. Its a bowdlerisation at best.
I think I skipped one of the tank ones when I checked, might have rejected. It involved (IIRC) controversial assumptions about tracks, turrets.
