Hot answers tagged

23 votes

If we can't burn the "reality check" tag, can we rename it?

I would propose naming the tag internal-consistency because the rules-consistency might be confusing for users. In the opposite direction of what it is now: reality-check makes them think it is "...
VLAZ's user avatar
  • 7,819
20 votes

Should we migrate our conlang questions?

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 ...
Monica Cellio's user avatar
19 votes
Accepted

Should we take off our [footwear]?

This feels pretty synonymous with clothing. I'd vote for merging the tag or just deleting it altogether.
Green's user avatar
  • 52.7k
17 votes
Accepted

Mutually-exclusive goals and how to discover them

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 ...
Secespitus's user avatar
  • 17.7k
14 votes
Accepted

Why are all tags un-capitalised?

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, ...
Secespitus's user avatar
  • 17.7k
14 votes

Scores and synonyms

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 ...
Monica Cellio's user avatar
13 votes
Accepted

Would a 'Handwavium' tag be a bad idea?

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 ...
James's user avatar
  • 32.8k
12 votes
Accepted

Should we rename [insect] to [insects]?

Agreed -- tags that are counting nouns should generally be plural. I just renamed it.
Monica Cellio's user avatar
12 votes

Do we need the [idea-based] tag on Main?

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 ...
James's user avatar
  • 32.8k
11 votes
Accepted

Do we need the [poke] tag on Meta?

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 ...
user's user avatar
  • 28.9k
11 votes
Accepted

Do we need the [idea-based] tag on Main?

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 ...
Separatrix's user avatar
  • 118k
11 votes
Accepted

Restore Tactics as a separate tag from warfare

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 -- ...
Monica Cellio's user avatar
10 votes
Accepted

Do we need the [4chan] tag on Meta?

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 ...
Monica Cellio's user avatar
9 votes
Accepted

Do we need [economy] and [economics]?

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 ...
bendl's user avatar
  • 3,600
8 votes

How bout adding a "Broad" or "General" tag?

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 ...
Tim B's user avatar
  • 77k
8 votes

Do our tags need tags?

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 ...
DaaaahWhoosh's user avatar
8 votes

New tag request : Character development!

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-...
Mrkvička's user avatar
  • 2,465
8 votes

Do we need the [idea-based] tag on Main?

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 ...
Vincent's user avatar
  • 16.8k
8 votes

Do we want era tags?

I was just going to make this a comment but...then I kept typing and realized it needed to be an answer. First...I like it: My OCD really appreciates the intent, to simplify a bunch of tags down to a ...
James's user avatar
  • 32.8k
8 votes

Is spatial trigonometry hard science?

hard-science, science-based and reality-check tags specify the perspective the OP wants on the answers. As such, editing out or in those tags is something that solely the OP can do. Any other user ...
L.Dutch's user avatar
  • 283k
8 votes

How to keep the "hard science" tag "hard"?

Tag misuse is not limited to the hard science tag. I often see worldbuilding process and other tags just thrown there without any founded reason. Usually this involves unexperienced users, who do not ...
L.Dutch's user avatar
  • 283k
7 votes
Accepted

What's the difference between 'reality-check' and 'science-based' or even 'hard-science'?

The tags description pretty much tell you all you need to know. reality-check (info) Unlike science-based and hard-science, reality-check question do not require a scientific explanation. The ...
clem steredenn's user avatar
7 votes

Should we be adding [science-based] to questions?

On the whole? I'd say we shouldn't. Edits to questions should respect authorial intent, when possible. It's the golden rule of editing someone else's work: You may have typed the words or made the ...
HDE 226868's user avatar
  • 101k
7 votes

Do we need the [open-source] tag on the Main Site?

I'm gonna go ahead and say no. As you said, there are only two questions tagged [open-source], both of them are over a year old, and both of them are closed. Nobody's using it and it doesn't seem ...
F1Krazy's user avatar
  • 14.2k
7 votes

Can we have a MacGyver tag or category?

Can we have a MacGyver tag (the actual name is of course up for debate) that allows for one-off questions involving an individual (or small group) in an imaginary world? My vote is for no. We had ...
user's user avatar
  • 28.9k
7 votes

We have the "dragons" tag, so do we really need "dragon-anatomy" too?

I don't see the need for dragon-anatomy. If we have that, then we should also have cat-anatomy, dog-anatomy, [whatever animal]-anatomy. The tag of the animal and the tag anatomy together reach their ...
L.Dutch's user avatar
  • 283k
7 votes

Can we have a controversy tag?

First and usual question when talking about tags: what does it mean to be an expert in controversy? And a more philosophical question: what does it make a topic controversial? Because I have seen ...
L.Dutch's user avatar
  • 283k
7 votes
Accepted

Can we include a "spherical-cow" tag?

I don't see a use for this proposed tag. A good rule of thumb for determine if a tag makes sense is to use it in the sentence "I am an expert in [tag]". A spherical cow is just an ...
L.Dutch's user avatar
  • 283k
6 votes

Where does Reality-Check actually fit in the burden of proof framework?

Reality-Check questions result in boolean answers I think of reality-check question as essentially asking Is this environment/system that I've constructed, is ...
Green's user avatar
  • 52.7k

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