6

Recently in the Suggested Edits Review Queue, there was a spate of edits changing only master/slave verbiage to primary/secondary.

In the absence of other improvements to a post, should we accept or reject these (and similar) edits?

Related post on meta.se

Extended discussion in chat

| |
13

As stated by SE staff, the answer should use terminology consistent with the respective product documentation, otherwise it will be confusing and therefore not useful. Subsequently, edits that deviate from the product documentation terms should be rejected, at least until that documentation itself changes.


By way of reference, the following substitutions are documented:

master/slave

whitelist/blacklist

  • 1
    Worth noting is that the link for "SQL Server" is actually a general style guide for Microsoft; it's not specific to SQL Server as a product. This makes sense because "master/slave" has never been used in official SQL Server docs (as far as I know); it's always been primary/secondary, primary/failover, primary/replica or (for mirroring) principal/mirror or principal/standby. Also of note is that SQL Server still has a special system database named "master" that isn't getting renamed any time soon. "Whitelist/blacklist" is not something SQL Server uses, so no substitution really applies. – Jeroen Mostert Aug 10 at 21:01
6

Reject

  • Edits of this type are an "attempt to respond".
  • Users shouldn't "rep-farm" by seeking out these posts and spamming the active feed while making no other improvement to the post
  • If we want a blanket policy to change verbiage, we can define the policy more explicitly AND apply the policy more uniformly than capricious spurts in the Review Queues
| |
2

Accept

  • These edits represent a good-faith effort to adhere to a policy implied by the parent and affiliate networks
  • They harm no one and save antagonisation for many
  • Engaging low-rep users by adhering to stated community standards is nothing to discourage
| |
  • 1
    This option assumes there is a stated standard which afaik there isn't – Tom V Aug 1 at 5:03
  • I only caught one of these in the queue and so my initial impression was as a one-off. After checking that the change of verbiage jived with the MySQL documentation, I signed off on it, as I think it was a fair change to make to bring in line with the documentation's word choices. – LowlyDBA - John McCall Aug 5 at 13:35
  • I had about 3. Had a quick look on the relative sites and found them to be ok. – John aka hot2use Aug 14 at 7:59

You must log in to answer this question.

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