Now that we have gathered some questions (and are closing in on the one-week-mark), it's time to evaluate the tags we have created.

Some statistics (as of writing):

  • We have created a total of 93 tags.
  • Out of these, 45 have only been used once.
  • 5 tags also have tag wiki excerpts.

Most of our tags fit into some broad categories.

Some are about staffing (such as ), some about the medium in question (), some are about moderator actions (). There are tags about user behaviour (), and about community properties ().

These broad categories correspond with our topic scope - which also means we might want to consider breaking tags down further, clarifying and disambiguating them, or merging existing tags into others.

What is this meta question for?

The purpose of this question is to start a discussion about site policy. Answers would, ideally, be one suggested change each - which, if necessary, can also be discussed in detail in a dedicated meta question. This question is for brainstorming and should eventually be superseded by a final draft.

What tagging guidelines do we want to establish?

By extension: Which of the current tags do we keep, how do we rename and synonymize them?

Let's look at our existing tags and agree on some unified guidelines. A good start is already made with @Andy's previous question, as well as @TomMedley's question:

  • When do we use "moderation" in a tag, and when do we use "moderator"? Where are synonyms useful?
  • Plural or singular?
  • "Community", or "site"? Are there differences? If so, when are they relevant?

Another question I'd like to bring up right away:

  • Which of our tags are not descriptive enough? Which are too broad, or too localized to be useful? (Remember, tags are meant for experts to filter for their prime topic - if there is only ever one question for a given tag, chances are we don't need the tag.)

6 Answers 6


We have a few very broad tags that might need to be removed, or differentiated:

  • This tag tells us very little about the question. Every question is, in a way, about a community. The only question featuring this tag (as of writing), is primarily about rules, not about the community - the rules tag could stand mostly on its own here.

  • Another very broad tag, "interaction" could apply to almost any action anyone takes. Someone will notice, and you need to communicate with them in a way - even if it's just a system trace.


  • 2
    I have made an interaction with you in a community. ;) Commented Aug 4, 2014 at 2:08
  • voting seems overly broad. What about "voting" does the question represent? "Voting behavior", "voting procedures", "methods of voting", "voting abnormalities", "how to vote"?
    – Andy
    Commented Aug 5, 2014 at 20:29
  • When my proposed edits are approved, both of these tags will be gone (assuming nobody else uses them in the meantime). Commented Aug 11, 2014 at 20:39

Prefer nouns. Tags categorize content. A category's name is usually a noun, not a verb.

Instead of , use . Rather than use or .

  • 2
    "Voting" is also a noun.
    – Air
    Commented Aug 4, 2014 at 15:14
  • This isn't always true. It doesn't make sense to write write for writing. When it doesn't make sense: I personally think think the infinite form of words (run, eat, drink, etc.) aren't as pleasing as the present tense of words (running, eating, drinking, etc.). Commented Aug 8, 2014 at 16:55
  • @AnnonomusPenguin Well, infinitive forms aren't exactly nouns. ;)
    – user98085
    Commented Aug 8, 2014 at 17:23
  • @FEichinger I couldn't think of a better example :) I just think "writing" sounds better than "write," but much better than "written." Commented Aug 8, 2014 at 17:28
  • @AnnonomusPenguin You are actually in agreement with this post! The words you referred to as "present tense" are actually participles or gerunds depending on usage and gerunds are effectively nouns.
    – Air
    Commented Aug 15, 2014 at 23:15
  • @AirThomas never knew that... huh. I stand corrected :) Commented Aug 15, 2014 at 23:16

Avoid demeaning tag names. Yes, it's tempting to jump to calling users and categorizing some as . But are these really the tags we want to use - and are these tags even necessary? Can't we find another way to refer to misbehaving users, perhaps by the individual nature of their misconduct? Or simply ?

This might be worth a more dedicated discussion, I'm just putting the thought (and the suggestion to remove the mentioned tags) out here for now.

  • I like the simple user-misconduct tag. I think trying to separate into individual categories of bad users will eventually become an exercise in futility or an exercise in learning English synonyms. What's something nice to call a troll that makes a good tag? "Under-bridge Dwelling user?"
    – Andy
    Commented Aug 5, 2014 at 11:50
  • Trolls and help vampires are user behaviors, bad, but still user behaviors. I don't think we need to categorize how to deal with behaviors in general and bad behaviors in specific.
    – Braiam
    Commented Aug 7, 2014 at 13:22
  • That's a fair point @Braiam. At the moment, it might be an important distinction to make in the future though. I think "user-behavior" would end up being a very broad category. We can let that split develop organically though.
    – Andy
    Commented Aug 7, 2014 at 21:26

I think we need to clear up . The usage of both of the questions tagged with this seem to indicate a privileges issue, not an access issue. To me, access implies access control, not privileges.

I propose renaming to

At the same time, I propose removing as it is very vague. The one question that uses it is refering to moderator privileges.

  • Friendly amendment: just make it "privileges". On some sites, users who aren't officially moderators gain "lesser moderation privileges", and it should be clear that questions about that are included in the tag. Commented Aug 15, 2014 at 15:40
  • Good point. Adjusted my post.
    – Andy
    Commented Aug 15, 2014 at 15:46

Some duplicates: (feel free to edit)

  • I just proposed an edit to retag the one question tagged community-rules as rules. That doesn't address the broader issue, but if somebody thinks we need that tag, you can go ahead and create the synonym anyway. Commented Aug 11, 2014 at 20:41
  • @Monica good idea, thanks. I'll update this post. Commented Aug 11, 2014 at 21:08
  • I agree that disruptive and problem tags should be synonym
    – Andy
    Commented Aug 15, 2014 at 14:06

Some ones that may have a very limited range of uses: (feel free to edit)

  • doesn't seem to be really useful. (I guess you could argue that it is too broad because it could be used for almost anything...) Done!
  • is vague. This could be used for anything that wants to focus on a specific geographical region. Done!

You must log in to answer this question.

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