Basically, what it says on the tin. The mainstream-physics closure dialog, which is accessible on the closure dialog as well as on closed questions (example), contains a link to the mainstream-physics site policy which contains the user ID of one of the elected site moderators, i.e. the same link that comes from the 'share' button on that meta thread.

enter image description here

Now, I don't think it's the end of the world, beyond a somewhat-shady Announcer badge, but now that we know it's there, wouldn't it be better to remove that numerical tagline? Can this be done on a relatively painless fashion?


It's not possible to change the text of an existing close reason. We'd have to create a whole new one, presumably with the same text except for the link URL. Personally, I don't think it's worth the trouble, although you're right that it would be best not to have a user ID in the URL.

If we ever decide that the text of the close reason is somehow inadequate or invalid and we want to make a significant change to it, that would justify abandoning the close reason in favor of a new one. At that point we should definitely make sure not to attach any user IDs to the URL.

  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, I suspected as much; if nothing else, there's certainly a record-keeping concern here. Arguably there's a bit of wiggle room in that the change is minor (maybe worth bringing up with the team?) but it's not a huge deal either. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Oct 2 '18 at 21:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sure, we can check with the team. I wouldn't expect much chance of a positive response though. $\endgroup$ – David Z Oct 2 '18 at 22:43
  • 11
    $\begingroup$ I changed it, @Emilio. Manish's badges can remain though, as a monument to his evil genius. $\endgroup$ – Shog9 Oct 3 '18 at 0:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Shog9 Thanks =). Out of curiosity, is this a new entry in the CloseAsOffTopicReasonTypes table, or is it a 'ghost' edit? $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Oct 3 '18 at 9:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @EmilioPisanty Old closed questions have the updated link, which suggests a ghost edit. $\endgroup$ – rob Oct 3 '18 at 13:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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