9
$\begingroup$

I recently noticed that we have a tag on meta for meta questions about the tag on the main site. It's a nice idea; it can be used to organize the many meta discussions we've had on the subject, which can often be hard to find.

Do we want to use this on other questions about the tag, and do we want to do the same for other main site tags which are commonly discussed? For instance, meta posts about a tag called could use the meta tag or (as I prefer) ; we could then retag the meta questions using to .

What do people think? Would this be helpful to organize meta questions about commonly discussed tags? Is this format helpful?

$\endgroup$
10
  • $\begingroup$ Since the meta tags only appear on meta, wouldn't the meta prefix be extraneous? $\endgroup$
    – kingledion
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 15:10
  • $\begingroup$ @kingledion Possibly. I'm not sure. It's just a suggestion. $\endgroup$
    – HDE 226868 Mod
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 15:11
  • $\begingroup$ @kingledion I think it would be nice to distinguish them explicitly from the ones used on the main site. Of course that's not necessary but I think it would make everything more clearly. meta-tags seem like they would be useful for the more commonly used tags on the main site. +1 from me $\endgroup$
    – Secespitus
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 15:15
  • $\begingroup$ @Secespitus I'm just saying, Worldbuilding and Worldbuilding Meta are two different sites, with two different tag dictionaries. If you are reading this, then click 'tags' in the top right, you won't see any tags from the main site. Also, you can notice in HDE's question text, there is the subtle coloring difference between the main site and meta-site tags. In any case, I think they are well distinguished enough. $\endgroup$
    – kingledion
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 15:18
  • $\begingroup$ I kind of like the idea for some of our more commonly discussed tags...not sure what the idea would apply to beyond hard science off the top of my head though. $\endgroup$
    – James
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 15:27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This question made my brain hurt. $\endgroup$
    – user10945
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 16:03
  • $\begingroup$ On this same, or at least a similar topic...is it worthwhile to add a tag on meta to collect all the on-topic discussions? $\endgroup$
    – James
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 17:30
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry I didn't mean on-topic, I meant the scope discussions, which is similar but different. $\endgroup$
    – James
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 17:37
  • $\begingroup$ @kingledion the meta prefix would help when tags do overlap (rare but possible) and might avoid confusion in actual discussions about tags in Meta posts. $\endgroup$
    – SRM
    Commented Mar 7, 2017 at 11:56
  • $\begingroup$ @James You have fully confused me. $\endgroup$
    – kingledion
    Commented Mar 7, 2017 at 13:52

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
8
$\begingroup$

I do think we have a certain subset of tags that get used a lot (like and ) and/or get talked about a lot (something like ); it seems like it'd be useful to have these tags in Meta so people can easily access a repository of previous discussions on these tags.

I don't think the extra 'meta' is needed though. That would only confuse people (if I'm looking for questions on Meta about the tag, I just want to search for 'hard-science').

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I agree on all points :) $\endgroup$
    – Tim B
    Commented Mar 6, 2017 at 20:59
3
$\begingroup$

Do our tags need tags, or do some sets of tags need tags? That is, is it useful to have a meta-hard-science tag and a meta-science-based tag and so on, or are the discussions intertwined and a lot of posts would get multiply tagged? If it's the latter, maybe we need a science-tags tag.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

The "meta-" prefix would help when tags do overlap* (rare but possible) and might avoid confusion in actual discussions about tags in Meta posts. I think the "meta-" prefix is a good idea.

  • "bug" could be a tag for the main site, for example. Even with the markup applied (and not everyone will apply the markup when typing), the background color is different but ambiguous which is which . And how would you have a meta tag for "bug" when Meta already has a bug tag?
$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ bug and bug already works all right. Markup: [tag:bug] and [meta-tag:bug] $\endgroup$
    – Mołot
    Commented Mar 7, 2017 at 12:01
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, but I'm talking about just a sentence in a comment or answer where someone doesn't apply all the markup. $\endgroup$
    – SRM
    Commented Mar 7, 2017 at 16:10
  • $\begingroup$ I believe than sticking with network wide custom of not prefixing meta tags is best for users of many sites. And if in doubt, apply markup. That said, there should be visual distinction between them. $\endgroup$
    – Mołot
    Commented Mar 7, 2017 at 16:14
  • $\begingroup$ See my updated answer. You can't have on Meta two tags of the same name, one that means "this question is a bug" and one that means "this question is about the real-site bug tag." Make sense? $\endgroup$
    – SRM
    Commented Mar 7, 2017 at 16:20

This site is temporarily in read-only mode and not accepting new answers.

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