Hot answers tagged

20

I'm going to say no for three reasons: Questions that are on-topic here shouldn't be migrated away without the asker's consent. People chose to ask them here and they're within our scope; why should we send our users away? Go ahead and suggest that they also look at the other site, but leave the decision in the hands of the asker. If the asker of an ...


19

This feels pretty synonymous with clothing. I'd vote for merging the tag or just deleting it altogether.


17

Normally not. There is an exception however: hard-science requires that you cite sources and have equations and stuff like that. It's a sort of meta-tag, something StackExchange in general doesn't like and it plays a special role here. If you look on Meta you will find lots of discussions about this tag and the therefore somewhat hidden requirements with ...


14

From Is there any reason why tags are lower-cased? on Meta.StackExchange: Lower-case tags have several advantages: Prevents people accidentally creating two tags that differ only in capitalisation, whether intentional or otherwise.* Prevents arguments over the correct capitalisation Creates a consistent look and feel I think for these reasons alone, it ...


14

Yeah, the synonym-suggestion interface really doesn't work well on most sites. First, there's the problem you brought up. Second and possibly more important, even if you do manage to suggest a synonym, people who can vote on it will never see it unless you publicize it. Yes, there's a page people can visit -- but who does? Even reviews can be hard to get ...


13

Whenever I see a "non-" tag I cringe a little, because tags are meant to indicate areas of expertise. Somebody might be an expert in planets or creature-design or magic or even in conducting reality-checks (though I admit that's a little farther out), but what does it mean to be an expert in non-reality-check? I think of tags more as categorization, not ...


13

I don't think it really matters, but I vote for plural. I forget where I first heard this, but tags are supposed to attract people who can say "I am an expert in/on [tag]". You would not say "I am an expert on dragon". Plus, the plural form is more encompassing. For instance, a question about how dragons interact with one another may not feel right under a '...


13

Yes. It's a bad idea. (or at least I would argue against it) I say this mainly because handwavium is used to explain away things we aren't worried about when we are bending the laws of the real universe. The questions themselves cannot be about the handwavium itself because it does whatever it is the author wants it to, meaning questions on the topic ...


12

Actually despite the fact I've said a few times now that I think it's too early for a tag cull...in this case I agree, the tag is pretty meaningless.


12

Agreed -- tags that are counting nouns should generally be plural. I just renamed it.


12

So to baseline. At its heart the Stack Network is about asking specific questions and getting specific answers. Admission: World Building is a weird beast. We are perhaps one of the sites that least adheres to this purpose. That said we continue to exist on the network and should strive to meet the intent of said network even as we have to adjust to ...


11

The reality-check tag says: Unlike the science-based tag, a reality-check question does not always require a scientific explanation. Most of the time, it is used to figure out if a concept make sense or not. Answers to the question should determine whether or not certain elements of the question are appropriate or realistic. So in other words if a ...


11

The tag in question is used by a single question, posted nearly three years ago. That question is voted +6/-9 for a net -3. The tag appears to try to describe something that is rather strongly discouraged by the only answer on the only question bearing that tag. That answer is voted +15/-0 for a net +15. Not only that; that answer is also written by a ...


11

The tag appears to be an invitation to close the question as opinion based or too broad, and was apparently created in protest at exactly that happening. As I said on the review, I see no purpose to it. Many of our most popular questions have been closed for these two reasons, adding a tag doesn't make the question any more valid. Tag has been used 5 times ...


11

status-completed: I deleted the synonym but didn't do anything about the 23 questions that were auto-retagged after the synonym was created. Both tactics and strategy apply to contexts beyond war -- police, corporate maneuvers, governments trying to bring about a particular end, resisters trying to bring about a particular end... this synonym should not ...


10

Renaming the tag would change the meaning. The distinction between magic and magic-based is that "magic" is descriptive and "magic-based" is proscriptive. A "magic" tag says "This question involves magic". A "magic-based" tag says "I want answers based on magic". While the former is a useful piece ...


10

I've removed the tag. I've also closed the question, which is asking about 4chan, not about Worldbuilding (our site). Meta is for questions about our site or about the SE software, not about where else on the Internet to ask worldbuilding questions. (It would be possible to ask a worldbuilding-resources question on main that involves other sites, but that'...


9

I think weapons are no more or less on-topic than plants, animals, or gravity. That is to say, if your question relates to how weapons fit into your world or what weapons your world may have or something like that, then it's on topic. If your question relates to how a given weapon may work, it's not likely to be on topic. I don't think we need a specific ...


9

I partially disagree and partially agree that they imply each other, fortunately it's easy to demonstrate in this case. A reality-check asks "is this possible/feasible/plausible". A hard-science asks "answer this using hard science". Now if we ask a question: I have a rocket weighing 10 tonnes, with 5 tonnes of that being propellent and efficiency ...


9

No, no, no, no. Not until you can, at the very least, say I am an expert in not-safe-for-work. Why should we judge what is considered "safe for work" for someone? What would be the specific criteria for adding this tag to a question? Why can't the same content be "safe for work" in some settings and "not safe for work" in others? (Think private office ...


9

After scanning the two tags, I'd say they're complete synonyms. There are 501 questions with the tag economy and 40 with the tag economics. It seems to me that economics can therefore be replaced with economy without any significant change. Furthermore, they are not different enough in spelling to warrant marking them as synonyms - anyone typing out ...


8

Remove life tag I agree that the life tag should be removed as it is highly ambiguous, and not everyone will read the tag wiki, leading to half a dozen different uses, making the tag meaningless. Your suggestion of renaming it to lifestyle is a good one, so that the misleading tag name will no longer exist. Apply biology tag Looking at the 7 existing life ...


8

I agree We appear to have a new "Should we (not) have this tag?" almost every day. We are a new site and we currently don't really know what we want to do with tags. On numerous answers about tag questions here on meta it has been said that we should not try to create artificial categories via meta discussion and I agree that there will be plenty of time ...


8

I like the idea of conlang being a synonym of linguistics. linguistics is broader than conlang, but on this site they are practically the same. But there are enough people who would want to use conlang instead of linguistics, that's worth keeping it around.


8

I don't think we should delete meta posts just because they no longer apply. Meta is still useful as part of our history and so we can look up why we did something (if there was a post about it). Moderators can add the status-completed tag, which is signal to anybody who comes across a question. Once questions fall off the main page, they'll only be seen ...


8

Yes. This irks me. A lot. Hm. I think that this issue arises from a more general class of problems in questions dealing with astronomy: imagination exceeds common sense. All three of the questions Michael Kjörling mentioned are tagged science-based. Yet the only possible science that you could put in an answer to one of those questions would be along the ...


8

No, this sort of meta tag is a barrier to entry and intuitive understanding of the site. In general we avoid meta tags (there have been discussions as to why in the past if you search for them) and there would have to be a strong reason to add any more. If you are asking a "broad overview" question then state in the question that you are looking for a broad ...


8

I do think we have a certain subset of tags that get used a lot (like hard-science and reality-check) and/or get talked about a lot (something like magic); 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 ...


8

Character development clearly falls under character building and is off-topic. I disagree with JDługosz on that "if some good questions could use it, then why not". The first items listed as off-topic in the help center are: Actions of individual characters, rather than elements of the world they inhabit Character building "But if there are some good ...


8

The tag is bad and the edit made it worse. The tag wiki invites brainstorming, but also adds the requirement to have high details and being to the point. This is a contradiction since brainstorming consists of throwing any idea that crosses your mind, they are simple and most are not good. To me, it seems like the intention was to create a tag ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible