I was looking through the meta questions, and saw a few on tags. This inspired me to participate in tag cleanup.
As I was editing away, I realized that as a 20k user, I have near-unlimited powers to edit tags. For example, I was looking at zero-gravity and microgravity, and decided that I should combine them into microgravity. Now, it is entirely within my powers to edit all zero-gravities into microgravity, write a new tag-wiki for microgravity, and then synonym them.
Another possibility is following James's suggestion to eliminate the history tag. I could redo all the history related wikis and then re-tag all 102 questions under history.
The question is, given that I intend to do this with the utmost care and accuracy strictly for the benefit of the site, should I do this without getting community input from meta? And what constitutes community input? If I get 10 upvotes but one answer saying this is a dumb idea, do I go ahead with it?
In the spirit of peer-review, as suggested below, I would like to bump this post again to get more feedback related to James' proposal as linked above. Basically, I would like to review and re-tag all the history questions that should belong under ancient-history, medieval etc.
Then, instead of going with new history development tag, I would like to re-do the description of history to specify that it is for the process of building the history of an invented world, not for events related to the actual history of our world.
If there are no great objections I will begin doing this next week.