5
$\begingroup$

I know that element specific tags have been discussed before. The consensus seemed to be that they are unnecessary and I agree with that. However, I wonder if hydrogen might be an exception. It's ubiquitous nature and the fact that it has it's own unique bond make me think yes but I cant articulate this well enough for a satisfactory tag wiki entry. Thoughts?

There is both a 'tagging' tag and a 'tags' tag here. Perhaps we need a meta meta.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ We can discuss the meta on meta itself. I've merged the two tags; thanks for the heads up :) $\endgroup$
    – ManishEarth
    Commented Dec 7, 2012 at 3:46
  • $\begingroup$ @ManishEarth Are you sure they mean the same thing? Isn't "tags" supposed to deal with questions regarding usage of tags, and "tagging" supposed to deal with how to tag questions? $\endgroup$
    – Pritt says Reinstate Monica
    Commented Jun 9, 2017 at 1:49

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

Meh, if the tag is flourishing I see no reason to remove it. BUT, I'd prefer to detag all the posts that use just because they contain Hydrogen somewhere in the post.

About the tag wiki: Generally you fill it with:

  • A bit more info about the tag
  • Relevant links for the tag (tutorials, etc if applicable)

It's fine if the tag doesn't have a wiki. If you want to add one, please don't copy it from somewhere else, write it in your own words.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ This is the right approach. If the question's focus isn't predominantly about hydrogen, it shouldn't be tagged as such. $\endgroup$
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Dec 7, 2012 at 15:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RobertCartaino: Yep :) I'll slowly detag the errant posts so that nobody notices. $\endgroup$
    – ManishEarth
    Commented Dec 7, 2012 at 17:12

You must log in to answer this question.

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