Tag Info

The purpose of the tag info is to provide a guidance to when the tag should be added to a question. Providing a wikipedia-like definition is only necessary when the tag is a particularly uncommon or niche word many users might not be familiar with. I believe that everyone should know what the word "abortion" means, so we do not need to have the controversy ...

Georgia, the US state, doesn't really need a tag (the one question using it that way was about a local election). Most states don't need a tag (CA being a notable exception, since they often use their singularly large economy for broader policy changes). Just use united-states to cover questions about it. The existing tag should be renamed to republic-of-...

I'm not sure those are actually meta tags in the sense that tags like subjective or beginner are. You're specifying that the question deals only with uk political systems, just like a Stack Overflow user might tag something c++ to indicate you're dealing with C++ and not some other language. Someone who knows a lot about UK politics could favorite the uk tag,...

In my opinion, these questions are probably good for the site, so long as they don't take over. They serve the purpose of answering questions on politics (which is not the same as answering political questions!). In turn, that may make people more engaged with their political system, which is always a good thing. I'd propose the summary-request tag for ...

I checked the tag. Five of six questions used DNC correctly to refer to the committee organization. I edited the tag out of the sixth (and democratic-party would not have made sense there). It was a Barack Obama administration question, not a party question. Anyway, those five questions are actually about the party committee rather than the party ...

It has been done. I've also created a synonym between the two.

I think we should rename the tag: It makes the tag more accurate, It brings us more in line with the tagging used on other sites There's no reason not to make the change. People will still find it if they start typing lgbt by @JJJ @JJJ also points out that we should make lgbt a synonym of lgbtq+ to keep it from being recreated Probably lgbtq+ is the best ...

Although I did not come up with it (but noticed it when someone else applied it to one of my questions), I think trump-impeachment is ok as a tag, as much as brexit is. Just tagging everything about Trump's impeachment with the generic impeachment tag risks overrunning the latter with Trump-specific stuff that's of little general value, like which witness ...

Stack Overflow used to have a homework tag, and they decided that we ought to treat homework questions the same as we treat any other question, so they got rid of it. This approach makes sense because one of the goals of an SE site is to be a reference for future people who have the same question. Answering a question differently because it's homework ...

To give an answer: The tag usage is in principal detailed in How do I correctly tag my questions? and What are tags, and how should I use them?. It boils down to choose tags that significantly describe the content of the question. Your question is about a newly introduced law in Poland. Therefore the Poland tag is absolutely justified. As far as I know it ...

Stack Exchange is a collaborative website. Users are encouraged to edit each other's content. When you post something on Stack Exchange, you do not have final say about it. This especially applies to tags. Tags are meta-information which is supposed to help to organize the website and help people to find questions they are interested in. They are not a ...

discussion (not really an explicit approach here, just some thoughts on the question) I think it may not be ideal in terms of finding questions. First of all, these tags are specific to the USA. So all second-amendment questions are also guns questions. On the other hand, not all guns questions are second-amendment questions (because of other countries). ...

I find these tags pretty useful and believe they should stay. Although there is some misuse occasionally. Like in this question which was tagged as donald-trump even though it is about the political powers of the President of the United States in general and not specific to Trump. But on the other hand we have questions which definitely are about specific ...

I disagree with the previously accepted answer as to the names of the tags; these tags would be misleading given that the court and the convention are not EU institutions, but institutions of the Council of Europe. If we decide that the expanded versions of the acronyms should be used, then the correct tags should probably be european-court-of-human-rights ...

If tags are being used properly, this issue should take care of itself. A political site will almost certainly host questions about the subject of terrorism. But be sure questions tagged terrorism are actually *about* the subject of "terrorism". It is a useful tag if that is what the question is actually about… even if the definition is hard to pin ...

A quick survey of other sites. Money uses United-States Skeptics uses United-States The Workplace uses united-states I can't find the tag anywhere else. So, I'm going to say be consistent, use united-states.

The full name should be used, for a number of reasons. If someone tries to put part of the name (for example, Osama Bin Laden might be tagged Osama, as he is certainly the most known Osama, or Bin Laden, as he's the most known Bil Laden, even though both those names are fairly common in that area of the world) it gets the entire name as the suggested tag. ...

united-states → usa health-insurance-exhange → healthcare voting-systems → voting

Also us -> united-states Maybe parliament <-> parliamentary (not sure which way to go)

All United States questions should be tagged united-states, so my preferred solution would be to just add the missing tag to nine of the questions. I did two today. So as not to dump nine questions to the top of the front page at once, I plan to wait to do the others. Note that two of the questions refer to the Supreme Court of Canada and are properly ...

Done. I don't know what else to write to satisfy the 30 character limit.

I believe that maintaining tags on old questions is an important service. Yes, it is a bit annoying that this results in these old questions getting pushed to the front-page. But that's a problem which affects all of Stack Exchange. By the way, if you only want to see new questions, then you could give the "Newest" questions page a try. It sorts questions ...

Tags aren't created in isolation, they don't exist until they are first added to a question. So, the simple answer is that we don't have a [left-wing] tag because no one thought their question would benefit from it. Do you have example questions where you feel the tag would be appropriate? If so, please share, adding a tag to them is trivial.

Yes, I think these questions do have a place. The primary mission of this website is to explain politics and political concepts to the interested reader. So explaining complicated concepts to a layman audience is a worthwhile effort. However, I do not see a connection to "soft questions". The question "Explain [thing] in simple terms" is just as hard or ...