14

One reason students-t can potentially keep reappearing is that it starts with "Student". We don't have any other tags starting with this word. So instead of blacklisting this tag, I suggest to create students-t-test as a synonym of t-test and students-t-distribution as a synonym of t-distribution. Then whoever starts typing "student..." in the tag field ...


13

I don't see why not. You make good points.


10

The two questions by tomclark seem to be on topic -- "What is the best way to test if the number of Males in group 1 is significantly greater than group 2, which is 0?" is clearly a statistical question (I am astonished to think that anyone would maintain that's off topic here. In need of clarification, perhaps, but definitely within our scope). ...


9

I agree that the modeling tag is pretty much useless because it is too unspecific and too vacuous. It is not the only tag like that. For example we have fitting×600 and model×900, which are also vacuous and could well be burninated & blacklisted as far as I am concerned. Some have argued that machine-learning×12,000 is an even more extreme example: How ...


8

basic-concepts is a meta tag, and our policy is not to have meta tags. See this this 2010 thread The final death of meta-tags? (that eliminated [beginner] tag) and this 2010 blog announcement by Jeff Atwood: The Death of Meta Tags. So basic-concepts should go. The problem with it (as with most meta tags) is that there is no clear scope. Which concepts are ...


8

I looked into it and it seems that data-generation-process is a pretty useless tag that should be eliminated. In most cases people seem to be using it instead of our well-established random-generation tag, which only creates confusion. With only 20 Qs, eliminating this tag is an easy task that can be done in around 3 sittings (see When re-tagging old ...


7

Update: the tag was burninated. In my opinion, 'best-practices' is a meta tag and should go. On contrary to 'self-study' it does not have a clear scope which would justify keeping it here. In summary, it is what you said: .....but its value in identifying content related to professional practice (which is the use it currently seems to serve) would be ...


6

Based on the difficulty formulating a clear scope for best-practices, and the comments that it seems to be a "meta" tag (which is generally not considered best practice), there seems to be a strong case for getting rid of this tag. I wonder whether questions like the following might benefit from something like professional-practice as an alternative: Ideas ...


5

The tag has now been emptied so this thread can be closed. I will accept my own answer.


5

Some questions were closed & got deleted, and the current situation is as follows. There are 7 questions left in latex, 5 of which are closed as off-topic. The 2 remaining ones are arguably on-topic and are about project-management. There is a closely related sweave tag. Together, latex and sweave have 10 threads, with 6 closed and 4 remaining open in ...


5

Following the discussion in the comments, I have removed sample-variance from all threads. The tag will be automatically deleted within 24h. I note that the wiki excerpt for our variance tag explicitly says that it should be used for sample variances: The expected squared deviation of a random variable from its mean; or, the average squared deviation of ...


4

Turns out that we have a theory tag. Its wiki excerpt says For questions about statistical theory. Always include a more specific tag as well. This means that it is a meta tag by definition. And so it should go. It does not seem to add any value, is used inconsistently, and is only causing confusion.


4

Here is my specific plan about what to do with the pearson tag, based on the above discussion with @Scortchi a year ago: Create tags and tag synonyms pearson-chi-squared$\to$chi-squared and pearson-goodness-of-fit$\to$chi-squared. Update: DONE. Go through all [pearson] threads and retag those about chi-squared into chi-squared. This will be a minority of [...


4

OK, I have removed all dynamic tags. For good measure, I also changed all dynamic-linear-model ones to dynamic-regression. Let's see what happens to the tags. If the tags remain, we can edit the wikis to point to this thread. (This just so I can accept my own answer so the issue is closed.)


4

FYI, I noticed a few weeks ago that kernel had come back from the dead (a little early for Halloween), again. I just removed it from the last question of this batch, but bumping this here as a reminder to active users that the tag is bad and should be killed again if it pops up again.


4

So I'm going to map kernel-density-estimate & kernel-regression to a new kernel-smoothing.


4

There seems to be agreement that such a tag without a tag wiki and used only thrice, without consistency, should be removed. And that maybe that could have been done without raising the issue on meta. @amoeba wrote in comments that " To be honest, when I come across a tag with only few uses that lacks a wiki excerpt and a clear scope, I just silently remove ...


4

With only three questions with the tag, if we don't know what it's for, and it's not much used, there's no reason to keep it. Unless there's some argument otherwise I'm inclined to remove it from those three questions.


4

Here is my proposal: Objective: eliminate the meta tag big-list. The tag would be removed by the method of blacklisting (see slhck's answer). That means the tag is removed and it can't be recreated (also, it does not trigger bumping of posts). Premise: minimize bumping of threads while performing necessary actions. Constraints: 3 threads would require ...


3

Yeah the description was made in a hurry sorry about that. Here was my thinking: I created a question about aggregating metrics, and the closest tag was model-evaluationwhich is close but not exactly right. Maybe a metrics tag would have been more appropriate, but that doesn't exist either.


3

inequality with 22 Qs and no wiki excerpt should be eliminated, partially by being replaced with probability-inequalities (145), partially by simply being removed. Currently people use it for questions like "How is independent T-Test valid for unequal samples?" or "Is the following inequality correct? How to prove it?" This does not make sense.


2

Update: If the tag is automatically destroyed after 24 hours without a thread (see @amoeba's comments above), it isn't clear that anything needs to be done. Because it seems likely to lead to some mis-taggings regardless of which tag it is made a synonym of, I would lean towards 'blacklisting' as the safest option.


2

It is clear that big-list is a bad tag; it is a meta tag, it is used inconsistently, and it should go. However, batch-removing & blacklisting a tag seems to be a complicated procedure that requires an intervention of SE developers; site moderators cannot do it. In contrast, "burninating" a tag simply means manually removing the tag from all questions; ...


1

We have a repeatability tag, with 26 threads, and no excerpt or wiki. Some of the questions are clearly about the intra-class correlation, but others may be about other topics. The current threads could be retagged, and [repeatability] can be deleted automatically after 24 hours.


1

I do not view that tag as problematic. I accept that it is a bit of a "how long is a piece of string" type of tag but I can see that some newcomers might find it helpful. Especially when browsing the site for old answers and threads this can be a helpful tag. The fact that people use it (you mention 200+ threads) adds to its perceived utility by some. As ...


1

With regard to blacklisting kernel, please read: How should we make tag blacklist requests?—site mods can't blacklist tags themselves. Noting that kernel hasn't recrudesced, & that SE might well take that as grounds for not blacklisting it, I'd rather not bother. It has, & @amoeba's had to deal with it. Upvote this answer if you agree it's not ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible