18

I think we should burninate the tag

Does it describe the contents of the questions to which it is applied? and is it unambiguous?

Totally ambiguous

Is the concept described even on-topic for the site?

Maybe? It doesn’t even describe a topic, so possibly? Still a poor tag though

Does the tag add any meaningful information to the post?

Absolutely not.

Does it mean the same thing in all common contexts?

No.

And, even the tag wiki starts with “ This tag is ambiguous”

So, I think we should burninate it. The tag only has 13 questions, so it shouldn’t be hard.

Friendly reminder that we need community consensus BEFORE we go and start burninating it (if that is what we decide to do)

5
  • 7
    All or virtually all of the questions having that tag appear to be about 360-degree photos or videos. Therefore, we could easily rename the tag, rather than removing it.
    – Cody Gray - on strike Mod
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 6:53
  • 10
    We need tags for all the numbers.
    – rene
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 8:42
  • 8
    Fun title suggestion for later: "[360] is being no-scoped"
    – starball
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 10:42
  • 2
    Let's do a 180 on [360].
    – kjhughes
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:44
  • 2
    Agree with @CodyGray that narrowing the name is the way to go. The existence of [360-degree-photo] and [360-degree-video] completions (or something similar) for 360 should help guide future use.
    – kjhughes
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:52

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
-3

There were only 13 questions, all about 360 degree photos.

I just went ahead and removed the tag from them. It will get deleted by roomba later as it now applies to no questions.

The questions tagged with it were all awful anyway.

9
  • 5
    "The questions tagged with it were all awful anyway." Unfortunately, now, thanks to your single-handed removal of the tag, we've lost access to those questions that might need attention. If all the questions were indeed about 360-degree photos, the tag should have been renamed, not unilaterally removed.
    – Cody Gray - on strike Mod
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 12:46
  • 5
    They're not lost. They appear in my list of edits. "the tag should have been renamed" Nah. Just because a "360-degree-photo" tag would apply to all of them doesn't mean that's a good or useful tag. That should be evaluated and created on its own merits, not just because it disambiguates an otherwise obviously bad tag.
    – Michael
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 12:57
  • 2
    "Using VITE + Vue3 - [Vue warn]: Component is missing template or render function" - is an exception, that is about a library called vue-360. But there is no such tag yet.
    – Gimby
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:12
  • 6
    I'm curious what makes you the ultimate authority on what is "an obviously bad tag"? When the question is "Should we...?", and you answer with "I already did", that's neither an answer, nor the appropriate way of engaging. Besides, renaming the tag is far more expedient than making useless, bumping edits to a bunch of old posts that clutter up the "interesting questions" page.
    – Cody Gray - on strike Mod
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:12
  • 1
    @CodyGray Nothing does. 8 people agreed with the sentiment to burn it. For a tag as irrelevant as this, that seems fine. I don't see the need to stand on ceremony for a cleanup task that took 1 person 2 minutes. If you have strong feelings that 360-degree-photo is a fantastically valuable tag that will give these mostly 2-sentence questions the attention they deserve, then feel free to create it and add them. I suspect that you actually agree that they're generally not worth wasting effort on, so I'm not sure why you're being standoffish.
    – Michael
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:16
  • 6
    I have strong feelings that taking it upon yourself to engage in unilateral action in response to a Meta question asking a question is inappropriate.
    – Cody Gray - on strike Mod
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:35
  • 3
    @CodyGray I respect that opinion, and I probably would have reconsidered it if I knew I'd spend this long trying to justify it. I thought it would be a quick and easy task that satisfies their request. 8 people, myself making 9, is not an action I'd consider "unilateral" for an action that affects 13 posts. If I'd found this in the wild, I wouldn't have even bothered posting on meta about it. I would have just done it. OP doesn't have the privilege of auto-applied edits, so it was reasonable that they did.
    – Michael
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 13:46
  • Another problem: edits should fix all problems with the post. I randomly spot-checked a question and noticed it still had a "Thank You" after your edit. If you truly believed that "The questions tagged with it were all awful anyway.", then the standard burninate process would have had them closed and deleted, not merely retagged.
    – pppery
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 16:43
  • 1
    @pppery I don't see a problem with a dozen awful questions continuing to exist that no one looks at. Stack Overflow gets thousands of awful questions every day.
    – Michael
    Commented Jan 3, 2023 at 16:48

You must log in to answer this question.

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