Skip to main content
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonymscreating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the dvi-* tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the dvi-* tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the dvi-* tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.

Apparently [tag:dvi-*] is unliked.
Source Link
Andy
  • 3.3k
  • 1
  • 14
  • 30

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the [tag:dvi-*]dvi-* tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the [tag:dvi-*] tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the dvi-* tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.

Source Link
Andy
  • 3.3k
  • 1
  • 14
  • 30

We shouldn't be creating tags just to make synonyms of them. Discussing merges/synonyms of existing tags makes sense, but if we don't have certain (hypothetical) tags yet, they shouldn't fall into our discussions.

Tags can be reorganized in the future. If you think we need one of those possible synonyms now, add it to a question and lets see if it sticks. It's entirely possible we won't need at the [tag:dvi-*] tags. But, if those tags won't stick, there is no sense in creating them just to create a synonym.