3

I was looking around the tag section and two of them caught my attention. and I was wondering why do we have these too specific(IMHO) tags, if anything both should just fall under no?

  • 1
    Not entirely convinced, though I'm inclined to agree with you in general. I'll wait to see if any other weigh in before I start tag synonyms though. – John Cavan Feb 24 '16 at 23:51
  • Well not really asking for a deletion or anything in particular @JohnCavan I'm just trying to discuss if we really need them, based on the outcome/feedback of this question we can then proceed to make a request or simply move on – Just Do It Feb 24 '16 at 23:54
  • 1
    That was the gist of my comment... I wanted to note that I generally agree with the premise though. Nevertheless, for the discussion to have a point, there's probably some form of action to arise, no? – John Cavan Feb 24 '16 at 23:55
  • True, @JohnCavan – Just Do It Feb 24 '16 at 23:56
  • Done, don't hesitate to post more if you get another good idea. – James Jenkins Feb 28 '16 at 12:06
4

We could also consider connecting and to . is pretty broad IMO.

I could honestly see either one, so thought I'd post this as an answer to allow the community to decide by votes.

  • This answer received great support, the merge and synonym creation has been completed. – James Jenkins Feb 28 '16 at 12:05
1

I like the idea of making and synonyms of . As synonyms they will still exist but will convert to when used.

You must log in to answer this question.

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