19

I think it is high time we get rid of the tag altogether.

It currently has 72 questions which cover a wide variety of topics, including:

There are already several related tags:

These could cover those questions that benefit from a time specific tag, but mostly is just really a Meta tag that these question could do perfectly without.

I propose we fight this till the end of !

Improve this question
6
  • 4
    Petition to change the title of this burnination request to "The [Time] has gone" upon removing the tag.
    – VLAZ
    Oct 12, 2022 at 11:23
  • 2
    @VLAZ or "The [time] flew out the window"
    – Luuklag
    Oct 12, 2022 at 11:27
  • 3
    This question is a good sign of the [time]s.
    – E_net4
    Oct 12, 2022 at 11:35
  • 4
    The tag guideline reads "For questions about, well, time", which is intentionally vague and probably more intended as tag:fun—I don't believe Meta is for general philosophical questions. +1
    – Joachim
    Oct 12, 2022 at 12:48
  • @Joachim taking after the kind of poetry prevalent on MSE namely the minimalist Haiku I did think -as undoubtedly other editors- about expanding the tag wiki. But, taking a step back, it seemed perfect as it. (I'll admit, it might be confusing to new users, and although general purpose the tags' use has been limited; so why change a marginal use tag wiki if its minimalism suits its broad application.)
    – bad_coder
    Oct 12, 2022 at 13:40
  • 3
    Another potentially related tag that already exists/may be more suitable in some cases: rate-limiting.
    – V2Blast
    Oct 12, 2022 at 19:12

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
-1

I'm of the opposite opinion; there isn't a suitable replacement. But what's more, this argument is flawed:

but mostly time is just really a Meta tag

Time is the subject of questions that ask: When?

The example questions included above just don't fit under the other tags that are specific to business processes! is about date/time data seen on the site, is about a post's timeline (it's specific), and lastly should likely be synonymized to .

It won't be possible to specialize tags for all the questions whose object is when, but it's necessary to have a tag that filters the subject from mere textual occurrences of such a frequently used word. Neither example 1 nor example 2 fit into any of the previously mentioned tags without changing their focus. I've read through the questions in the tag previously and most of them are correctly tagged following the logic explained in this answer.

A tag being general purpose does not make it a meta tag.

Improve this answer
4
  • 5
    The first example really is about the workings of the review queue. Tagging that with review (and suggested-edits) suffices. There is nothing that [time] would add in that case. The second example, I took out since it is not currently tagged with time. On that question [asking-questions] would suffice. Also these two examples also perfectly highlight that the meaning of the tag isn't the same in all questions, hence it is ambiguous and should be deleted.
    – Luuklag
    Oct 12, 2022 at 12:23
  • @Luuklag not it does not suffice as I already explained and is established practice of the tag system. (Your arguments at this point are non-sequitur - the arguments in the original request are also non-sequitur.)
    – bad_coder
    Oct 12, 2022 at 12:40
  • 6
    According to this logic we should have tags for 'why' questions (tag:purpose/tag:cause), 'what' questions (tag:definition/tag:explanation), and 'how' questions (tag:means). It feels like they wouldn't add anything meaningful either.
    – Joachim
    Oct 12, 2022 at 12:57
  • 1
    @Joachim that is taking the logic beyond what's intended in the answer. How Qs need a subject tag, what is the tag by definition, why can be on-topic or not depending - but it's not a subject. If you notice not all adverbs equate to tags, but "what" does. (So if you notice carefully, my answer is properly written).
    – bad_coder
    Oct 12, 2022 at 13:19

You must log in to answer this question.

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