I think one of the less refined features of SE is tagging. Even here on meta:
There are loads of questionably useful tags on Stack Overflow, here's just a few random ones that took no effort to find:
Newer users often tag questions almost the same way they wrote their title, something like:
Where should I put my config file?
[php] [where] [put] [config] [file]
It was my understanding that for a tag to deserve its existence, it should be able to stand on its own. Is that too narrow of an assessment?
And of course there are so many tags that are nearly identical.
It seems like a lot of time is spent dealing with synoymns, retag requests, blacklist requests and the like. I generally feel like most of these are a waste of time.
In general I think the tag system works well, but could be better. One idea I had was using one set of "tags" for the language and another for the more minor details or sub-categories, for example:
[onclick] [closures] [variable-scope] [textarea]
Another thought I had was peer review for creating new tags. It seems even 6K is not enough to know how to tag properly. (see revision 2)
I don't know if this is really a problem, or if it's localized to Stack Overflow. I can see some of these ideas being overkill on smaller sites.
My big question is: Is there anything that could be done to improve the tag system, or is everyone happy with the way it is? If there are no changes or desire for change, I'd feel a lot better doing janitor work with the tags. Any plans on the back burner from the dev team? Any ideas or suggestions from the community?