This article was nominated for deletion on 7 November 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Internet culture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Sociology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Linguistics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

This article definitely needs to be reworked. Most quotations are verbal and not in quotes. Otherwise I think this article is ok. Zorro^z Msgs 15:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Models of collaborative tagging. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091229044011/http://www.humanfactors.illinois.edu/Reports%26PapersPDFs/IEEESocialcom09/A%20Semantic%20Imitation%20Model%20of%20Social%20Tag%20Choices%20%282%29.pdf to http://www.humanfactors.illinois.edu/Reports%26PapersPDFs/IEEESocialcom09/A%20Semantic%20Imitation%20Model%20of%20Social%20Tag%20Choices%20%282%29.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:10, 3 February 2018 (UTC) reply

This is an interesting topic, with useful information about how models of social tagging work (or fail to). However, the grammar is not exactly that of English, and some of the writing could be clearer. And of course, more references would help. I'll add it to my to-do list, but don't wait on me! yoyo ( talk) 03:06, 1 September 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Yahya Abdal-Aziz and anyone else who wants to improve this article: I'm almost finished copy editing the article. However, I became increasingly concerned as I worked through; around halfway through, the article began to show signs of original research and essay-like qualities, so I added a few maintenance tags at the top of the article.

Some parts definitely seem like someone drew their own conclusions based on pre-existing research. Example: The simple model, however, does not explain why certain tags would to be "imitated" more often than others, and therefore cannot provide a realistic mechanism for tag choices and how social tags could be utilized as navigational cues during exploratory search, not to mention the obviously over-simplified representation of individual users by balls in an urn. I've already trimmed out egregious phrases like "obviously", but regardless, these conclusions must be attributed and cited. Otherwise, they should be deleted.

Furthermore, most of the journal sources only appear as a citation once, or twice at best. We need better in-line referencing for verification purposes. Bobbychan193 ( talk) 19:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC) reply

I've finished copy editing the article. Best of luck moving forward. Bobbychan193 ( talk) 20:32, 19 October 2019 (UTC) reply

@ Bobbychan193, thanks for your work! I've done a little copy-editing today, mostly making it less wordy. Much still remains to do. yoyo ( talk) 02:11, 20 October 2019 (UTC) reply