Re: Consider this: What makes a good node title?

[jdporter]

But what if someone comes in and types "error line" in the search box? Or "line number"? Don't they deserve to find this node as well?

IMHO, the only way OGB's suggested title could be improved would be to insert "Program" in front of "Line". Generally, longer titles are better, at least if the words are high in information content.

someone else will probably misspell or typo it tomorrow

That's an extremely bad reason for retaining a misspelling. It would foster the growth of subcommunities that share misconceptions about certain words. E.g. we'd have the "occurance" people sharing information, apart from the mainstream "occurrence" crowd, because they wouldn't find each other's nodes. (I'm serious about this.) I don't think it's a problem to fix misspellings in titles, because generally the same misspelling occurs in the body of the node — and since janitors don't fix such things in node contents, a Super Search on the misspelling will find the node.

IMHO, one of the main reasons for retitling nodes is as a pedagogical instrument: the janitors are showing the OP, and others, what constitutes a good title for a given question.

[sauoq]

Don't they deserve to find this node as well?

Are you asking me if they deserve to be inundated with duplicate information? Or if they deserve to be treated to this particular cookie of a node?

What they deserve is to find their answer (no matter which words come to mind) and more people will if we tamper with titles less.

E.g. we'd have the "occurance" people sharing information, apart from the mainstream "occurrence" crowd, because they wouldn't find each other's nodes.

Sorry, but that's a ridiculously bizarre notion. I know how to spell "occurrence" correctly but I wouldn't hesitate for one second to reply to a node with "occurrance" in the title. I don't think anyone else here would either. (At least, not most.) But, if someone believes it's a good search term for their problem, they should have a reasonable chance of finding a relevant node by searching on it regardless of whether they misspell it.

the janitors are showing the OP, and others, what constitutes a good title for a given question.

Nobody's taking notes. In any case, all the janitors can show is what they believe to be a good node title. And that's not some special skill you go to school for... we all have concepts about what makes a node title good.

I know I am suggesting a way of thinking about titling that is a bit different. To sum it up, the pool of titles chosen by throngs of people in the spur of the moment will actually be higher quality than the pool of titles chosen by a small group of people removed from the issues and acting on preconceived notions about what a good title is.

[radiantmatrix]

I know how to spell "occurrence" correctly but I wouldn't hesitate for one second to reply to a node with "occurrance" in the title.

I don't really think that's the point. I think the point is that, if I'm looking for information about 'occurances of numbers', I will find nodes with the misspelling and participate in them. Whereas, if I look for 'occurrances of numbers' I will find nodes with the correct spelling and participate in them instead. It's all about people who are interested in the same information being able to find each other.

By ensuring the correct spelling in the node title, you can bring the two groups together. A simple Search for 'occurrance' would find all the nodes about occurrances of numbers, and a Super Search for 'occurance' would still find those with the misspelling preserved in the body. Everyone wins.

[jdporter]

Whereas, if I look for 'occurrances of numbers' I will find nodes with the correct spelling

No you won't, because the correct spelling is "occurrences". :-)

But yes, you got my point.