14

I was looking at questions and it looks like we have a fair number of questions about Xi Jinping but no tag. I was thinking about creating one.

We also have a fair number of questions about Cuba's Fidel Castro but no tag. There's also no tag despite questions about him being present here.

I do know that we have tags for other prominent current or recent high-level politicians, including , , , , , and .

My question is, when does a politician get their own tag? If I ask a question about a specific politician that does not already have their own tag, what criteria should I apply in determining whether to create a tag for them?

Is it based on some subjective opinion on how "important" they are to world politics or is it based more on the number of questions about the politician that we have on this site? Is there some special unwritten "commies don't get tags" rule?

4
  • 2
    Related: How should we deal with tags that refer to individuals?
    – CDJB Mod
    Feb 11, 2022 at 11:38
  • Related help center article: "Create new tags privliege" and "What are tags, and how should I use them?"
    – Philipp Mod
    Feb 11, 2022 at 11:52
  • Not an answer, I'm just a passer-by here, but I always assumed it would be a matter of volume. If a politician gets enough questions about them and mostly them, it warrants the creation of a tag. If every politician with 5-or-less questions would get their own tag, the amount of tags would explode, but most of the examples you mention go above that (except Chavez and Macron).
    – Mast
    Feb 17, 2022 at 7:20
  • 1
    I support giving commies tags. If anything, I would give commies more tags - not because they are such great commies, but indirectly, due to their persistence and typical long-lasting terms and their impact in terms of disastrous policies and large body counts. BTW, technically speaking Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez are commies & they have tags. Putin constantly refers to the USSR borders, USSR victories, and is seen generally as the modern day KGB (of the USSR days) product and descendant. So definitely a commie! Feb 20, 2022 at 13:31

1 Answer 1

13

Tags should not reflect the relevance of a person for the political landscape, they should reflect the relevance for our community. While there should be a correlation between the two, those two are not directly linked. (I elaborated on this distinction in greater detail on the meta-question Suggestion for additional tags "Jersey" and "Guernsey")

The relevance of a person for our community is easy to quantify, though: How many questions are there about the person? Personally I think that a tag is warranted when there are about 3-4 questions which are primarily about this subject.

When should a tag about a person be added to a question? As the help center says:

Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.

Before you create a new person-tag, ask yourself:

  • Is it plausible that there are people who would consider themselves "experts" on a specific person? As in "I can answer every question about [person]"? When the person is a nation-level political leader, then it is certainly plausible that there are experts about them around. When they are local politicians or random celebrities who enjoy their 10 minutes of political fame because they tweeted some political hot take which got picked up by the media on a slow news day, then that's unlikely.
  • Is it plausible that there would be people who come to this site specifically to search for this tag? As in "I want to learn everything about [person], and I expect that Politics Stack Exchange has questions about them"?
  • Are there enough questions to make this tag useful? A tag which has only one question is likely not useful. So if you are unsure if a person who triggered a question because they are currently in the news will actually stay relevant for us in the future, then you might probably want to wait until there are a couple more questions about them. But if you expect more questions about them in the future, then creating the tag preemptively might be a good idea. For example, I expect that now that Germany elected a new chancellor, that will become just as useful as .

When you consider adding a person-tag to a question, ask yourself:

  • Is this question actually about this person? When a question just mentions a person but isn't actually about them, then there are probably other tags which are more fitting.
  • Would someone who is an expert in this person be more qualified to answer this question than someone who has never heard of them?
  • Would someone who wants to know more about this person be interested in reading the answers to this question?

A question which just mentions a person in passing but is actually about a completely different subject would perhaps not need the tag. One which is asking specifically about that person would.


To get back to the actual quesiton: Do we need ? Yes, I think we do. (as I wrote, just because a question mentions Xi Jinping does not mean the question is about Xi Jinping. But some of those 66 search results very likely are).

1
  • 6
    Having reviewed the 20 questions referencing "Xi Jinping", I found only 2 that I felt comfortable with adding the tag and have done so.
    – Rick Smith
    Feb 11, 2022 at 16:19

You must log in to answer this question.

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