1

I say we don't. However, YMMV.

The tag was recently created and has a total of 5 questions attached to it. No tag-wiki or tag-excerpt either.

It's a bit of a specific tag, a bit too specific IMO. I can't imagine anyone searching or favouring or ignoring that tag.

What do we do with this tag?

13
  • This is tough. We have one for the Millennium Falcon, but that has inarguably more materials to ask questions about. I just can't see how this helps anyone in a real way. But it harms nothing, either. – user31178 Apr 12 '16 at 2:27
  • 1
    @CreationEdge I’m not a huge fan of millennium-falcon either. I guess the site is doomed to be in a Tagging Cold War forever. – Molag Bal Apr 12 '16 at 2:34
  • @amarillo More tags is fine, if they make sense and people will actually use them. But I don't think we have Knight Bus questions in our future... – user31178 Apr 12 '16 at 2:45
  • 4
    I'd be happy to keep it, now it's been created. It does no particular harm to have this tag, and it might be useful for somebody. (I don't have a strong position on tagging. I'm frankly bored of the level of discussion around minor tags.) – alexwlchan Apr 12 '16 at 6:26
  • @alexwlchan - Amen to that. There are far too many side-discussions going on about tag edits, time that could be far better spent on useful activities. – Valorum Apr 12 '16 at 12:39
  • @alexwlchan Agreed. Mooz might well be right that it wasn't worth creating this tag, but nor would it be worth the trouble of getting rid of it. – Rand al'Thor Apr 12 '16 at 12:55
  • @Richard Like what? If I wanted to do something useful, I’d mow my lawn. Asking whether Jedi use the Force to brush their teeth isn’t exactly useful either. – Molag Bal Apr 12 '16 at 13:46
  • @amarillo - I meant site-useful, not real-world-useful. – Valorum Apr 12 '16 at 14:42
  • 3
    Nobody seems interested in site-wide discussions on tagging so we're left with tackling individual issues as they crop up. If people are tired of it, the solution isn't expressing frustration with those trying to change what they can on the small scale. The solution is getting users with the right experience to help start making better, site-wide guidelines. – user31178 Apr 12 '16 at 19:50
  • @creationedge - I've still yet to see any justification as to why these changes should be made. I'd be less oppositional if someone could explain why this is a good thing to do. – Valorum Apr 13 '16 at 11:28
  • @Richard At the very least, it'd limit these side discussions. ;) – user31178 Apr 13 '16 at 13:05
  • 1
    @Richard It categorizes questions better. That's what tags are for. Besides, people are going to spend their own time on whatever task they choose. You answer 300 questions per day, and I write 300 tag wiki excerpts per day. Some people like cleaning up tags. I personally don't see tag cleanups as being less useful than other maintenance on the site. – Molag Bal Apr 14 '16 at 1:31
  • @amarillo - I'm not seeing it. It's not enough (in my book) to airily wave a hand and say "well, it categorizes questions better". I want actual proof that someone, anyone is benefiting. – Valorum Apr 14 '16 at 5:44
1

Maybe it wasn't worth creating, but nor is it worth getting rid of at this stage.

We have a lot of tags about fairly minor items or concepts in the Harry Potter series. For instance: (22 questions), (13 questions), (24 questions), (9 questions). Your argument about specificity applies to these tags too, and so does the argument in @amarillo's now-deleted answer that none of these tags is going to be used without . Remove and we open the floodgates for removing a whole lot of other minor HP-related tags. If we do that manually, we'll spam up the front page with more-or-less useless edits; and it's certainly not an important enough issue to be worth bugging a CM or dev to burninate the tags.

Furthermore, the tag passes all our tag tests. Firstly, consider this test proposed by a CM on main meta:

  1. Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? Yes.

  2. Is the concept described even on-topic for the site? Yes.

  3. Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post? Yes.

  4. Does it mean the same thing in all common contexts? Yes.

Even more impressively, passes the (rather more draconian, and now more or less rejected) tag test we got from Chemistry.SE:

  1. Does it make sense to be an "expert in "? Yes (2 points).

  2. Does it make sense for a question to be tagged only with ? No (-1 point).

  3. Does have a single, universally-unambiguous meaning? Yes (2 points).

  4. Is likely to be used correctly just based on its name? Yes (2 points).

  5. Are there "enough" (> 15) but not "too many" (> 10% site-wide) questions that qualify for ? Maybe (1 point).

  6. Are people like to use to find questions to answer? Yes (2 points).

  7. Are there likely some users (be objective!) who will favorite or ignore ? Maybe (1 point).

  8. Could be reasonably used to feed questions to a specialized chat room? Maybe (1 point).

  9. Can be used to search for questions (for any reason) in a way that keyword searching cannot accomplish? No (-1 point).

    Total is 9, which is enough not to get rid of the tag even by the standards of this test.

3
  • But you approved 80% of the edits to create the tag... – Molag Bal Apr 12 '16 at 14:27
  • @amarillo Yeah, I should really have skipped those reviews. Still, if I hadn't approved them, someone else probably would have. I wasn't the one who created the tag or proposed the edits in the first place. – Rand al'Thor Apr 12 '16 at 15:04
  • 1
    Oh well. The Tagging Cold War continues. – Molag Bal Apr 12 '16 at 15:16
0

Since deleting it won't improve the site in any meaningful way but will result in the front page being spammed with irrelevant minor edits, I think we should just leave it alone.

Per my earlier comment and answer to a similar question, I'd also like to suggest that asking future questions about minor tag edits like this should be avoided unless you can explain how changing these tags will result in some sort of improvement to the site.

You must log in to answer this question.

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