Tags should be used for categorization, not for giving additional information.
There are bugs which are present in all versions from 8-10, which already takes up 3 tags out of the 5 maximum. One more is taken up by bugs, leaving only one more. Tagging for each version will force us to remove more useful tags from the question, which is bad.
I feel the best way to deal with potential platform dependencies is to mention your platform in the question and don't use the platform name as tag unless you are sure the platform plays a role. We can only use 5 tags and if everyone is going to tag his OS and version number, regardless of relevance, differentiation will be hugely impacted.
If you own ...
Only use the windows tag if you have evidence to believe that
your question is related to this specific OS. Do NOT use it to
simply indicate the OS you are currently using. You could provide that
information in the body of your question.
Only use the osx tag if you have evidence to believe that
your question is related to this ...
I dont think version tags should be used at all, especially not to specify the version the user just happens to use (that information can be included in the question). If the question is indeed related to a certain version it might be relevant for future versions as well and hence the tag will be obsolete pretty soon.
This is my personal take on the issue:
It is generally better to keep the number of tags down, and keep tags relatively broad as categories. There is granularity limit beyond which categorization will not make searching easier. So let us try to find a good balance.
When is it a good idea to create a new tag then?
I think that one (but not the only!) ...
No to the question you intend to ask; yes to the question you actually asked.
The tag wolfram-programming-cloud is for questions which are related inherently to the WPC. If your question is about the Wolfram Language, whether or not you access the WL via the WPC, then it does not warrant the tag. If your question is about something you think is a bug in the ...
Do NOT use the version-6 tag in bug reporting. If you are
posting about apparent bugs, provide the Mathematica version(s) in
which you are seeing your issues in the body of your question and when
more information becomes available use or update the header as
described in this Meta
Do NOT use the version-7 tag in bug ...
After looking through the list of data-tagged questions, I agree with Verbeia. Overly general tags like data are essentially void of information, thus they do more harm than good.
I suggest blacklisting this tag to get rid of it for good. Otherwise it will keep coming back.
Would blacklisting auto-remove it from all those 250 questions?
In my opinion probability-and-stats should be replaced by
probability-and-statistics with the synonyms probability and statistics. The difference between probability and statistics becomes too blurred when using Mathematica to justify having them as separate tags. For example, one might want to characterize a random process (probability theory) and ...
I've just answered such a question. I think the status quo is fine, it serendipitously allows for variations on how to answer the question at the expense of the poster getting his specific answer (and "accepted" rep points for the answerer with the wrong version, I guess). I think this is more positive for individual question-answer quality in the long run ...
non-differential-equations is a bit too much like "everything-else", which is worse than what we have now. Tags are not necessarily exclusive containers... I tend to see them more as labels. A picture labeled "rose" can also have the labels "red" and "flower". As the tag wiki explains, if you have a DE, use equation-solving+differential-equations; if you're ...
I second Szabolcs's proposal. But I think we can have a pre-defined template (e.g. a certain formated phrase). For every question with a bugs tag, we can fill its metadata into the template and put it at the beginning of the question like
Bug Note: (introduced in 7.0) (fixed in 9.0.1)
so afterward we can search them as something like
body:"Bug Note:" body:...
I agree that list-manipulation alone is too broad, but list-filtering will eventually suffer from the same problem as well. I think the problem here is that while list-manipulation is a perfectly good umbrella tag for such questions, most users don't use additional tags to narrow down the scope (or if they do, they use/create highly specific tags).
Is the wolfram-programming-cloud tag appropriate for a question that is specific to the WPC?
No. That would be selfish. The intent of this site is to house a knowledge repository that would be helpful to future users. Otherwise there would be no point in, for example, closing duplicate questions. Similarly, the many, who use only plain old Mathematica don't ...
Here is what I propose, an example of a question template that should be used when you create a topic about a "feature" you find serious:
Let's say it was already confirmed by WRI Support:
Bug introduced in Vxxx or earlier, persisting through Vxxxx (or similar according to relevant topic on meta)
(addition for serious/annoying ...
Don't worry it should not happen often as it seems they are picked randomly each couple of hours:
What determines the example tags? (tags in the placeholder of the tags section when asking new question)
Don't have much experience with other sites but bugs usage seems to be unique here, for this community benefit, so we probably should not hope it will be ...
Admittedly this isn't clean but insofar as the standard header as been followed it should be possible to filter as desired, with acceptable accuracy, using
[bugs] is:question -"and fixed in" or its antonym [bugs] is:question "and fixed in"
If system-modeler questions tend to revolve mostly around WSM, I see some value in keeping a single tag, but if Wolfram keeps pushing integration in Mathematica and system modeling/Modelica inside Mathematica becomes its own thing, I think the split is a sound idea. I would additionally suggest to change the tag system-modeler to wolfram-system-modeler or ...
The tag itself should have a minimum of 100 questions to be awarded any badge. You'll get all eligible badges when each of them reach 100 questions. This is explained in the sidebar
These badges are awarded for participating in non community-wiki questions with particular tags. If enough votes are earned in a tag with 100+ total questions, the badge will ...
Here is my opinion:
Tags are for questions, not for answers, so if someone answers a question using an unusual or highly original technique, that is a good reason to up-vote the answer, but no reason to retag the question.
I don't think we need tags especially intended for re-tagging. If a tag doesn't identify a category useful for tagging, I can't see it ...
If I understand you correctly, you are looking for a tag that applies to cases where a combination of the followings apply:
timing and/or temporal order is important during evaluation/runtime; timing evaluation
computation results in a dynamically maintained object rather than a static one; dynamic
producing/manipulating real-time continuous data/streams; ...
I have started manually tagging questions with faq. I am following the metric that if a question has at least eight existing duplicates it is a frequently asked question. This should help to keep faq from merely meaning popular. The threshold may be increased in the future to limit the number of faq questions.
If indeed we decide to merge complex and complex-analysis, we should first make sure that the appropriate questions have already been tagged with both complex and calculus-and-analysis. This might take a while. I would suggest volunteer retaggers to do it gradually over the course of a few days so as not to overwhelm the front page.