7

We're already having several conversations about what our tagging protocol should be:

However, in various conversations, there have been tags discussed that we don't want, that have appeared. Since we don't any moderators yet, we can't delete them easily, so we will have to do a clean-up once some are appointed. Please post below any tags, or kinds of tags, that you think should be avoided or deleted, and why.

| |
8

Bad

Need clarification/etc.

  • , - These are going to need tag wikis to make clear what kinds of questions they should be used on.
  • - This tag is terrible on most other fiction-based SE sites, but makes some sense here, I think. I don't know that we need to do anything with it, but it's worth keeping an eye on.
| |
  • 2
    Add dieties and god to your list. – El'endia Starman Apr 29 '15 at 19:59
  • @El'endiaStarman Both of those tags have no questions, so they'll be auto-deleted at 3:00a UTC when the deletion script runs. – senshin Apr 29 '15 at 20:00
  • For statue, maybe "representations"? – Luna Apr 29 '15 at 20:01
  • @Luna FWIW, I like art – durron597 Apr 29 '15 at 20:54
  • 1
    god-items is pretty bad. We need a tag for essentially magical items, such as Thor's hammer, Hermes' shoes or similar. Depending on whether we call them "magical", "mythical", etc., I suggest (adjective)-artifacts. – Luna Apr 29 '15 at 21:17
  • I disagree with eliminating sea-creatures and demi-gods. Those are a level more specific than mythical-creatures and gods and I think that level of specificity is sufficient. – user93 May 3 '15 at 7:51
  • I've recently edited history and mythohistory they should be in the review queue. One is for questions about factual history and the other for mythical history. – user93 May 3 '15 at 7:52
4

Since the question seems to asking for tags worth avoiding in the future, as well as tags that are already problematic, I'll add a speculative answer here.

In addition to the overly vague tags senshin listed, we could potentially end up with the opposite problem of overly specific tags. SciFi.SE has had some meta discussions about "character tags" which I think apply here too. It was summarized in this answer as follows:

the consensus based on recent meta discussions is that character tags should stick around if they identify some significant subset of question that a person might be an "expert" in. In other words, it's feasible that someone could know a whole lot about Darth Vader, but not really be interested in the rest of Star Wars. OTOH, it's less likely that someone would only want to answer questions about R2-D2 -- those questions will probably be answered by people who are general Star Wars experts.

So, for example, it might be okay for us to have tags like or since they have multiple stories that revolve primarily around them, and it's at least conceivable that someone would be knowledgeable about those specific stories, whereas "less popular characters" like or definitely wouldn't cut it.

Similarly, we should avoid making tags for individual books/scrolls/carvings/tablets, since as Jeff himself said, one tag for every novel ever written would be ridiculous.

| |
  • This is a really nice answer, thanks for your insight and links to SciFi SE :) – Luna May 3 '15 at 21:51
1

Bad

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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