# Add tag for Dwarf/Dwarves? [duplicate]

There is a tag for elf/elves but not for dwarf/dwarves.

• On the main, or on meta? Jul 31, 2013 at 16:51
• On the main tag list Jul 31, 2013 at 16:55
• I've removed the [status-declined] tag from this, because tags in general aren't something the mods decide, and obviously the tag eventually ended up being made anyway. (I've also changed the main tag from [feature-request] to [discussion], since there's no feature being requested.)
– V2Blast StaffMod
Jan 11, 2020 at 23:40
• We covered this again a couple of years later and came to a different conclusion. I've closed this as a duplicate of that more recent discussion. Jan 13, 2020 at 16:27

## There's an elf tag? Why?

Looking at the and questions (there are only five between them, all of them from 2011), some of them seem like the tag is unneeded and some it's arguably appropriate. I imagine that if they'd been made today, the tags would have been removed; the site's policies have evolved since then.

## Are there questions that need a dwarf tag?

Just because there's a tag for one thing doesn't mean we need tags for all complementary things as well. Tags don't get made in a vacuum; they're created because there is a need in the community. If you ask a question that you feel needs to be tagged this way after reading up on what tags are for, that's when the tag should be made. Anything before that is jumping the gun and adding unnecessary "noise" to the site.

I don't think we need the tag, so I don't think we need a dwarf tag, as much as I like the stout bearded folk.

The tag is only used on two questions, both related to 4e racial abilities, but I don't know what it would help people find. I suggest we consider removing it.

• Fair point. This isn't 4e.stackexchange, but rpg.stackexchange. On that point, there probably shouldn't be class specific tags either. Jul 31, 2013 at 17:26
• @TheEvilGreebo Come on into chat for that discussion, if you like.
– BESW
Jul 31, 2013 at 17:28
• There is an argument for tags like [dnd-4e-elf] or [dnd-4e-cleric], because those can be useful to search on for people looking for build advice/issues. I know such subtags have been frowned on in the past, but if we remove class tags, tags like this may be a sensible replacement. Aug 1, 2013 at 5:37

Probably not.

The point of the SE tagging system is to be emergent - to appear as needed to usefully describe and group questions. Therefore we don't create them 'on spec' - they should appear because there's already a set of questions they'd help out.

Furthermore, tags like "elves" and dwarves" are bad from several points of view. There's very little value to clustering a question about Shadowrun elves and D&D elves - besides some nominal similarity, they're different things. So mainly you're using the tag to cluster within games/game groups. The only two "elf" questions are within D&D 4e, but that then makes "elf" a somewhat undesirable meta tag (doesn't stand alone as the only tag on a question). We try not to do meta tags except in very limited circumstances.

The real question is - why do you think there should be? "Parity" with the elf tag is not really a good reason in and of itself.

• "The real question is - why do you think there should be? "Parity" with the elf tag is not really a good reason in and of itself. " --> I didn't say their should be. I said, "Should there be?" Jul 31, 2013 at 17:25
• @TheEvilGreebo It's implicit in making a meta post and getting everyone's attention that you think there's a discrepancy that might need correcting. If not... well, what's the problem? Aug 1, 2013 at 5:35
• I'm afraid that you're confusing inference and implication. Aug 1, 2013 at 12:15
• <Rolls eyes> if you're just asking out of boredom, we probably have better things to do then. Aug 1, 2013 at 20:30