2
$\begingroup$

There are a few tags that are duplicate (and so I think should be made into synonyms):

  1. theory and cs-theory
  2. design and design-thinking (I'm not sure about this one, actually.)

If more appear (when more questions with new tags will be asked) I'll add them to here if it would still be relevant.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Please do not post such big threads. They quickly become a mess. Post one thread per tag or group of closely-related tag. $\endgroup$ – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' May 28 '17 at 21:46
2
$\begingroup$

The best solution would be to just remove and by editing. "CS" theory is redundant on a site for Computer Science Educators, and I don't really know what is supposed to mean, or how it will be a useful tag.

A synonym is useful if the tags are easily confused, but highly different. If you type 'theory', the correct tag () will pop up, so a synonym with probably doesn't have much value. The same applies for .

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I see. Well then this question is quite pointless as it comes from my misunderstanding of what tag synonym means. $\endgroup$ – ItamarG3 May 28 '17 at 10:48
  • $\begingroup$ @ItamarGreen It's still a useful discussion, as those tags are problematic. It's easier just to retag, though, because tag synonyms end up getting complicated, quickly, and the autocomplete helps people find very similar tags. I'll edit the bad tags later, unless anyone has objections, and soon the rep needed to create tags will rise, preventing confusions like this from being so common. $\endgroup$ – Aurora0001 May 28 '17 at 10:52
  • $\begingroup$ The rep "issue" is precisely why I posted this here :P $\endgroup$ – ItamarG3 May 28 '17 at 10:54
  • $\begingroup$ How much consensus do we need to see before someone just goes in and makes the edits? $\endgroup$ – thesecretmaster May 28 '17 at 12:34
  • $\begingroup$ @thesecretmaster For a trivial edit like this, I don't think a large consensus is needed; if it turns out to be a bad idea and there is value in those tags, the edits can always be reverted. It's only for larger scale retags that you might want to give people some warning in advance. $\endgroup$ – Aurora0001 May 28 '17 at 12:36
2
$\begingroup$

The tag could reference the school of thought that comes from Stanford's d.school. (Read more about design thinking here.) As a result, it should stand alone as an applicable, educational tag.

That said, is probably too broad to be helpful. There could be and among a handful of others. A general tag does not serve a clear enough purpose within our context.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm all for getting rid of both design and theory. They're both far too vague to be useful in the long run. $\endgroup$ – Ben I. May 28 '17 at 21:34
1
$\begingroup$

would be different from , or any other kind of theory. I agree that we don't also need , but that's because is too vague to be useful.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So instead of deleting cs-theory, delete theory? That is a good point. $\endgroup$ – ItamarG3 May 29 '17 at 7:13

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