3

We have a bunch of tags for parashiyos, books of Tanach, books of shas, and, occasionally, other books:

, , , , , , and many others (especially for parashiyos)

Some of them are ambiguous:

(parasha or book?), (book or man?), (book or meat?)

Some potential tags, to be named in line with existing ones, will be ambiguous:

(parasha or book?)

I think this is a problem (people will not find tags they want, though that's mitigated with the use of synonyms, but, worse, the lack of consistency is ugly, and, worst of all, some tags will be ambiguous (are already)), and my first question is whether others agree it's a problem. If so, my second is how to solve it.

1
  • I see now that teruma is being used both for the parasha and for the tithe.
    – msh210 Mod
    Jun 23, 2011 at 20:17

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

I propose as a solution that we name (section-of-)book-related tags in a way that clarifies that's what they are, tentatively along the following lines.

, , , , , ,

5
  • I think this is the right idea, but the examples you mentioned still have some issues: Consistency - 'book' is English and 'parsha' is Hebrew; Ambiguity - Does a question about an idea in the first chapter of the Torah deserve 'genesis-book', 'genesis-parsha', both, or neither?
    – WAF
    May 25, 2011 at 20:20
  • @WAF, re "Does a question about an idea in the first chapter of the Torah deserve 'genesis-book', 'genesis-parsha', both, or neither?": See meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/127. Actually, if we have a tag for each parasha I don't see what use a tag of Genesis is. But it probably will get re-created if deleted, so....
    – msh210 Mod
    May 25, 2011 at 21:02
  • @WAF, what's a parasha called in English? Both pinchas-section and pinchas-reading sound funny to me.
    – msh210 Mod
    May 26, 2011 at 2:45
  • I don't know - portion? Either way, I know what a book is in Hebrew.
    – WAF
    May 26, 2011 at 4:06
  • @WAF, wait, wait... I know this one.... Seriously, yes, we can use Hebrew throughout. Otoh, the discrepancy between book's being English and parasha's being Hebrew doesn't seem like a big deal to me. In the end, if this solution is decided upon, the details don't matter much to me.
    – msh210 Mod
    May 26, 2011 at 4:32
0

While there are some SE sites that went that way, personally I don't like it for several reasons, but mostly because I think it's unnecessary.

I also think that some of those tags are too specific, I don't see real value in tagging according to the parasha. Are those questions really going to need to be seperated from an adjacent parasha?
I think that in addition to the book (e.g. or ) is sufficient for that.

In other situations, it would make sense to go by "book", e.g. for gmara a מסכת could be appropriate.

With regards to e.g. Ezekiel, I'm not sure it needs to be tagged seperately (but I could be wrong here), just include an additional tag for category: e.g. , , etc...

As for chullin, I have no opinion, since I admit I dont know what kind of meat is chullin...

3
  • I could definitely envision someone wanting to pull up all questions about a particular parsha or book of the Bible.
    – Isaac Moses Mod
    May 25, 2011 at 14:03
  • AviD, (a) I agree with @IsaacMoses that people may very well want all questions on a parasha (say, during its week). (b) People have been tagging per parasha, so will presumably continue to. (I suppose that's not really a reason to keep the tags, though, as each can be made a synonym of its book's tag.) More to the point: (c) You state a solution to the problem I raised w.r.t. parashiyos, but you don't clearly address the problem I raised w.r.t. other books: how would you deal with Ezekiel (book vs. man) or chulin (book vs. meat) or even Shoftim (book vs. parasha-synonym)?
    – msh210 Mod
    May 25, 2011 at 15:34
  • I think any time the division is a meaningful division it deserves its own tag. A maseches is certainly a module and a parsha is conventionally one. A perek is not and a genre that appears in a small number of disconnected places in Tana"ch may not be.
    – WAF
    May 25, 2011 at 20:23

You must log in to answer this question.

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