1
\$\begingroup\$

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

Should one be added?

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ On the main, or on meta? \$\endgroup\$ – C. Ross Jul 31 '13 at 16:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ On the main tag list \$\endgroup\$ – The Evil Greebo Jul 31 '13 at 16:55
11
\$\begingroup\$

There's an 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 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.

\$\endgroup\$
7
\$\begingroup\$

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.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Fair point. This isn't 4e.stackexchange, but rpg.stackexchange. On that point, there probably shouldn't be class specific tags either. \$\endgroup\$ – The Evil Greebo Jul 31 '13 at 17:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @TheEvilGreebo Come on into chat for that discussion, if you like. \$\endgroup\$ – BESW Jul 31 '13 at 17:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ 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. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 1 '13 at 5:37
4
\$\begingroup\$

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.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ "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?" \$\endgroup\$ – The Evil Greebo Jul 31 '13 at 17:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @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? \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 1 '13 at 5:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm afraid that you're confusing inference and implication. \$\endgroup\$ – The Evil Greebo Aug 1 '13 at 12:15
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ <Rolls eyes> if you're just asking out of boredom, we probably have better things to do then. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk Aug 1 '13 at 20:30

You must log in to answer this question.

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