10
\$\begingroup\$

I recently had a look through the "new" tags and found that most of them apply to 1 or 2 questions, and aren't really necessary. Can we remove these obsolete tags? For reference, the tags I'm referring to are:

  • Circuit golf, which currently applies to 2 questions, one closed and the other is due to be cleaned up in the next few days:

    The system will automatically delete unlocked, unanswered questions that have negative score that are at least 30 days old Source

  • Computability Theory, with a single question with that tag. If this one isn't removed, it would greatly benefit a tag description

  • Yabasic, which seems as though it could be merged with the existing, and used, tag.

  • Mapping, where one of the tagged questions doesn't appear to apply, and the other seems to be covered by

Thoughts on removing or keeping these tags?


Side note: Remember, users with more than 1,250 reputation and a total answer score of 5 or more on a given tag can vote on tag synonyms for that tag, and a few synonyms are still pending.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The two mapping questions seem to be about different definitions of the word, one about geographical mapping and the other about computational mapping. \$\endgroup\$ – Kamil Drakari Apr 13 '18 at 18:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ FWIW a tag which only has one question will be deleted automatically after 6 months \$\endgroup\$ – Peter Taylor Apr 13 '18 at 22:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ I say, Thin 'em out! \$\endgroup\$ – Redwolf Programs Apr 15 '18 at 4:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ I voted on the pending tag synonyms. Personally, I don't think the suggestion for [ascii] -> [ascii-art] makes sense. \$\endgroup\$ – mbomb007 Apr 23 '18 at 14:31
10
\$\begingroup\$

Note, all of this is my opinion as a user, not as a moderator


A lot of these tags are certainly useless. But some of them aren't bad tags just because there aren't a lot of questions for them. Here are my thoughts on each tag individually:

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'd like to note that something-basic should be merged only if it's actually a variant of Basic. It's the language that matters, not the name (In case you weren't bothered to read the link in the post) \$\endgroup\$ – Nathan Merrill Apr 14 '18 at 1:38
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @NathanMerrill I went back and double checked all of the x-basic tags. They all look like basic dialects to me? \$\endgroup\$ – James Apr 14 '18 at 1:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ Oh, they are :) I'm just clarifying for future readers. \$\endgroup\$ – Nathan Merrill Apr 14 '18 at 2:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ For the record, VB is nothing like what most people think of just basic. \$\endgroup\$ – Pavel Apr 14 '18 at 2:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ TI-Basic is defined to be BASIC-like in Wikipedia, and I don't think they are similar. But there isn't a tag. \$\endgroup\$ – jimmy23013 Apr 14 '18 at 8:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ Maybe also remove VBA(Visual Basic for Applications) please? \$\endgroup\$ – l4m2 May 11 '18 at 8:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ Why smilebasic survive? \$\endgroup\$ – l4m2 May 11 '18 at 8:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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