Proposal: I propose simply burning the alternate-worldstag, applying appropriate replacement tags as necessary to the connected questions. I don't believe it brings enough context to a question to make it easier to answer.
Good additions, I think.
It seems to me that most of the "how did X evolve" questions aren't even really interested in evolutionary science per se. As you say, we're given a fanciful aesthetic and nothing else. Even though "evolution" is tagged, I don't think that's what the querent is actually after, except in the broadest of strokes. ...
Your understanding appears to mesh quite well with mine.
The tag wiki should explain, ideally within 2-3 sentences at most, which questions should use the tag. It should not need any external references in order to do so. It may also suggest alternative, related tags which may be of interest but which are not synonyms (consider for example the spaceflight ...
Proposal: Change the alternate-reality tag to reflect the parallel-universe/multiverse context.
I was tempted to bundle alternate-reality in as a synonym with the alternate-earth and alternate-history tags, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better served to broaden its scope to incorporate the "multiverse" or "parallel-universe" idea proposed in this ...
Burnination is the remedy for widely-used tags that we don't want. It's an alternative to editing it out of all the questions. So that's not what we're looking for here; if there are one or two uses of a tag and that tag needs to go away, just edit the questions.
Infrequently-used is not the same as unneeded; it's possible to have a specialized tag that ...
One of the problems which I think new users using the tag face is that they don't necessarily know much about it. Stack Exchange can be a bit complicated to understand when you first join, and a tag which requires enforcement like the hard-science tag does just adds another layer of complexity. This may have been what happened with What would/should humanity ...
The same guidelines for using other people's work that apply to posts (questions and answers) also apply to tag wikis: quote only what's relevant, don't quote excessively, and cite and link the source.
I think linking to, and selectively quoting from, external resources in tag wikis is fine. I've seen this on other sites. I've also seen tag wikis that ...
The tag has had a long, long journey, and at every step of the way, we've decided we don't want it. Deletion hasn't worked, nor has writing an inclusive wiki.
It seems a blacklist is the only way to permanently get rid of it.
Synonymize society and anthropology
Anthropology means "the study of human society" and therefore applies to most society questions. If there are outliers, they can be tagged as necessary, but it seems reasonable to remap anthropology to society.
Do we want the anthropology tag? for previous discussion.
Evolution is not a black box where anything can happen
The problem with this is evolutionary biology isn't nearly as much of a black box as your question seems to suppose it is. We may not know all the ins and outs of evolution, but geneticists, anatomists, and biologists in general have been collecting data for nigh on two centuries now. People have ...
If we define "science based" as adhering to "all world rules adhere to real-life science" then we're basically creating a (near vs actual) synonym for the Hard Science tag. The only distinction would become one of need for equations and papers while the other wouldn't. It would be Science Lite.
Because Worldbuilding ...
Proposal: as suggested in a comment, change the alternate-reality excerpt to say
For questions in which reality is different than it is in real life. This may range from small, environmental changes to absolute revisions of the laws of physics.
This differentiates it from alternate-history. alternate-earth is fine as is.
This makes the three:
Synonymize vehicles and transportation
See Consolidate tags "vehicles" and "transportation"? for prior discussion. Nearly all transportation occurs in vehicles, and if it doesn't, it usually has its own tag, like teleportation.
I'm suggesting we remap vehicles to transportation / make transportation the main tag.
Linking to an external site can help confirm that we are talking about the same thing. For example, if we had a Gutenberg tag, we might mean the man, the printing press, the bible, or the site with free digital copies. Those links help disambiguate our use of Gutenberg.
Links can also serve a secondary purpose of giving people places to find out more ...
This sounds like a good idea. However, I think there's little actual standardizing to be done, and far more formalizing of the standard that we already have.
Looking at the top few tags, the excerpts seem to follow this format:
For questions about [short topic description]. [Additional important information].
For example, the biology tag has this ...
Just a few suggestions based on other SE sites, how they handle this, and what I've found. I've gone to some of the larger ones to see how they do it, and some smaller ones to get a more rounded view. I'm mostly looking at the excerpts, because that's what most people see, though the summary shouldn't be discounted of course.
Arqade has a lot of ...
I agree, the first sentence isn't really needed. However it does include the word "usually" and it is true that most fantasy scenarios usually involve a special caste of magic using individuals.
So I'm ambivalent about it. I don't mind the sentence being there, but also don't object to it being deleted.
For questions relating to magic or other fantasy elements in a relatively modern setting.
Still seems short, but I think explaining any more than that would limit the tag.
By the way, is there a hat for editing tag wikis? Because if so, and people like this one, I want to be the one to put it in.
For questions relating to the near future of humanity, featuring cultural or technological advancements that could plausibly occur within the next few decades.
I still think it's missing something, but that's all I could think of.
Yes and no - as Monica says, it's possible to have tags that look useless - only 1 or 2 questions, no tag wiki - but could actually add a lot of value to categorisation of questions.
You're over 2k rep, so you have access to the moderator tools - at the bottom of the page (on the stats tab) is a section for recently-created tags. I tend to watch this and ...