4

Pardon me, but this looks a bit strange. I was trying to help a developer a few minutes ago in a thread where this has been added. It has been a Qt Quick related question, but we have and for those. Then, I was trying to visit the tag wiki, but there is nothing present there.

I thought my last change would be to go to the threads it contains, but then I saw some inconsistency. It seems to have become a container for random stuff, unfortunately. It is probably due to its too generic name, and people's misunderstand and ignorance what it was created for. It may have been created for invalid reasons as well.

I cannot personally understand its purpose, hence I would not know how to fix this to be reasonably good. My personal opinion is just to let it go for now, and people may recreate or retag specific threads if that is valuable. That being said, I am willing to listen to what others' think, so take my personal opinion with a bit o salt, please.

PS: Yeah, I am aware of the qtquick2 and qt-quick naming inconsistency, but forget about it now. I will have a separate thread for that relatively soon, hopefully.

  • I removed the tag or retagged most of them leaving a few where I'm in doubt... – rene Sep 28 '13 at 11:14
  • 4
    Quick! Burn [quick]! – Doorknob Sep 28 '13 at 12:20
2

Yes, [quick] should be removed as it's too generic. Not a synonym either, but removed entirely.

7

Yeah, looking through the various questions with that tag, there is some Qt content, but various other (somewhat confusing) uses as well. I don't really see a valid use there, nor see how the tag itself could be rescued. It all seems a bit of a meta tag, or is at least at risk of becoming one.

I'd say this one is safe to get rid off. And at 76 uses it should be easy enough to get rid of manually with some manual clean-up as well.

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