On SO, the tag has 7806 questions and the tag has 1476 questions. I see no distinction between the two tags. has significantly more questions, and has an appropriate tag wiki. doesn't have a wiki at all, and is less frequently used. I suggest is merged into , and that be used from now on.

Thoughts, meta? :)

closed as off-topic by Monica Cellio, random, Martijn Pieters, rene, Shadow Jul 21 '14 at 19:34

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question pertains only to a specific site in the Stack Exchange Network. Questions on Meta Stack Exchange should pertain to our network or software that drives it as a whole, within the guidelines defined in the help center. You should ask this question on the meta site where your concern originated." – Monica Cellio, random, Martijn Pieters, rene, Shadow
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.


I think this calls for a manual clean-up of the tag rather than a merge. That tag is used an awful lot in conjunction with , which leads me to think that most uses refer to the animate() function. Any non-jquery uses of should be retagged to , but I don't think we can do this with the moderator tools.

  • It cannot be done with the moderator tools. While the "Old Tag Name" field in the "Merge Tags" page seems to accept two tags, it is really accepting a single tag. If you enter test-2 test-3, it thinks you meant test-2test-3. The autocomplete works for the tags separately, though. – kiamlaluno Aug 4 '12 at 17:19
  • 1
    Ahh, I see. Perhaps that definition should be added to the animate tag's tag wiki, so that more questions aren't mislabeled in the future? And yes, it sounds like we should all try and clean it up together. Team effort? ;) Thanks for your response! – WendiKidd Aug 4 '12 at 21:30
  • 1
    Perhaps there should be a jquery-animate tag instead? – Martijn Pieters Aug 5 '12 at 11:32
  • @MartijnPieters Yes, that's a good idea. Once we clean up all the non-jquery uses of animate I can use the tag merge tools to change all the remaining instances to jquery-animate in one go. – Bill the Lizard Aug 5 '12 at 13:09
  • @BilltheLizard So THAT took forever! Manual cleanup complete :) I removed the animate tag from all non-jquery questions (except for a migrated question I couldn't edit). I also created the jquery-animate tag and wrote the tag wiki for it. So it should be all ready for you to do the special moderator swap of the animate tag questions to jquery-animate! I'm excited to see it nice and clean, because that took a while to retag all those questions, haha. Thanks! : D – WendiKidd Aug 8 '12 at 3:43
  • @WendiKidd Awesome! Thanks a lot for doing that. Now I noticed that there's already a synonym from jquery-animate to jquery-animation. It already had 700+ uses, so I wonder if we should keep that and just move the tag wiki to it. – Bill the Lizard Aug 8 '12 at 11:06
  • @BilltheLizard Hmm... Since the function itself is called animate(), personally I'd think it best to merge the jquery-animation questions into jquery-animate. But that's your call ;) – WendiKidd Aug 8 '12 at 12:58
  • @WendiKidd Yeah, I agree. Thanks again. – Bill the Lizard Aug 8 '12 at 13:05
  • Isn't it a bit broad to have animate as a synonym of jquery-animate? Wouldn't it be more logical just to allow community moderation to edit out any question which uses animate to mean jquery-animate? – James Donnelly Oct 31 '13 at 8:41
  • @JamesDonnelly Is there some other use for an animate tag? – Bill the Lizard Oct 31 '13 at 11:00
  • @BilltheLizard I'm not sure, however animate is a word which doesn't have its roots in jQuery. What if you wanted to animate an image within a C++ application, for instance? – James Donnelly Oct 31 '13 at 11:03
  • @JamesDonnelly Then you'd use the animation tag. The tagging UI guides you toward that tag already. i.stack.imgur.com/etDi1.png – Bill the Lizard Oct 31 '13 at 11:08

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