3

In light of the current Weekly Challenge, two questions have been asked so far about pets. These questions used a new tag, . We already have a tag . Why both? I think questions about pets should go into . Anyone disagree?

6
  • 1
    Note: If the community agrees with this proposition, don't retag all pets questions. Rather, a ♦ mod can merge the tags, which is much quicker/easier and doesn't bump the questions to the top of the recently-edited-questions list. – msh210 Mar 18 '12 at 5:58
  • As one of the offenders: I first tagged my post "animals", then saw the other one and said "oh, we have 'pets'" so retagged, and only long after that noticed that these were the only two. I have no objection to merging them. – Monica Cellio Mar 18 '12 at 17:05
  • 1
    @msh210 It seems the community is rather indifferent. – Double AA Mar 21 '12 at 2:43
  • Four months later and I've only seen three questions tagged "pets", the original two and one new one today. I proposed a synonym. – Monica Cellio Jul 19 '12 at 15:46
  • 1
    As this has a net vote score of 3, @MonicaCellio's answer agreeing has a net vote socre of 2, and IsaacMoses's answer disagreeing has a net vote score of 0, I'm merging the tags as proposed and tagging this question status-completed. – msh210 Jul 24 '12 at 2:35
  • This title made me think of this: minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2006/05/25/… – Seth J Jul 24 '12 at 13:06
2

I think "pets" is unnecessarily specialized and there aren't that many pet-related questions. (We do have some others that are currently tagged "animals", by the way.) I say merge pets into animals and create a synonym.

0

Aren't pets a special case of animals with their own particular set of issues?

I think the question really is whether there are likely to be a substantial number of pet-specific questions, and whether anyone will ever want to click on a tag to find them all (without having to sift through all the other animal questions). I think the answer to both of these questions is "Yes."

2
  • I would only agree that they deserve to be separate if someone can demonstrate a nafka mina: somewhere pets applies but not animals. Otherwise are we tagging every pets question with animals too? – Double AA Mar 18 '12 at 17:11
  • Kind of like your answer here: meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/a/580/759 – Double AA Mar 18 '12 at 17:27
0

It was I who created "pets" tag. If you think it is overspecialization, feel free to merge it.

You must log in to answer this question.

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