I asked a question a minute ago about a fact check, and considered adding a tag. I don't see one, but was wondering if it were a valid thing to add to politics.se given the number of times statements of questionable veracity are made by politicians (leading to inevitable questions on this website). I see it similar to the "story-identification" tag on sci-fi.se, where it isn't specific to the question, but rather indicates a different type of question.

  • The more I think about this, the more I realize that this might be encroaching on Skeptics.SE, but then again, that might be more a commentary about current mainstream politics than a good reason not to consider this. But to that point, it might be worth it to require the "facts" being checked come from a politician or spokesman,,,
    – Sidney
    Jan 26, 2017 at 22:32
  • the more I realize that this might be encroaching on Skeptics.SE -> So? It's perfectly okay for topics to be on-topic for 2, 3, or even more SE sites. All sites have different communities and approaches, so asking the same question on multiple sites can actually be useful!
    – user11249
    Jan 26, 2017 at 23:13
  • 3
    @Carpetsmoker, crossposting is a no-no; if you feel that your question is on-topic on two sites, it usually means you haven't worked on your Q well enough. Jan 27, 2017 at 3:52
  • @bytebuster Things are a bit more subtle than that. Of course posting exactly the same question to three different sites is not very useful, but since that answer was posted in 2010 we have a lot more sites (>160), and asking questions that are roughly the same on different sites is typically okay. For example, in this specific case I can see very different answers to the same questions on sceptics.SE and politics.SE.
    – user11249
    Jan 27, 2017 at 13:18
  • 3
    We could try it and see. The potential problem I see with fact-check as a tag is that it seems like a meta-tag, and I'm not sure how many people would be filtering by it. Jan 27, 2017 at 15:58
  • Rule of thumb: something reminding you of "identification" questions, means that something isn't a good thing. ID questions are typically a negative (even on SFF in my opinion, though admittedly they handle them far better than other sites). See recent answer from Shog about ID questions on Literature BETA Meta site.
    – user4012
    Jan 27, 2017 at 16:09

1 Answer 1



The purpose and scope of this SE is not to check facts, but rather to answer questions about politics and political processes. Such questions are clearly in the wheel house if Skeptics SE And should be referred there if they are good questions.

Most of the "Fact Check" questions I have seen here have been "Please validate my opinion" questions. Those belong no where on SE.

You must log in to answer this question.

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