10
\$\begingroup\$

The tag often appears on questions about op amps. In many cases questions would be tagged with both and instead of the single, correct (at least, until I recently fixed the tags on such questions). It seems as if users often type "operational amplifier" in the tags input box and get both tags instead of the single correct one.

Of the questions which are still tagged all but one really have to do with op amps and should be tagged with . There is one question which seems to use in the sense of "will this be operational?" but I don't see much use for this tag in that sense, especially in light of the fact that it is often used for questions involving op amps.

Would it make sense to make a synonym of in the hope that users will be more likely to tag questions correctly? We might still get questions tagged with both and but at least the latter is generally applicable to questions about op amps whereas doesn't really make any sense on its own.

\$\endgroup\$
9
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ I think it would make a lot of sense, if anyone has a problem with this speak up, if there are no issues, I'll merge it in a few days. And thanks for cleaning up the tags \$\endgroup\$ – Voltage Spike Mar 16 at 16:57
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I think this is an excellent suggestion. As you note, the term operational doesn't really make sense on its own. \$\endgroup\$ – Peter Smith Mar 18 at 14:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ Could the tag be safely removed altogether, to prevent mistagging? \$\endgroup\$ – Mast Mar 24 at 10:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mast It would almost certainly be re-created again when someone types "operational amplifier" (note the space) in the tags input box. Or are you suggesting blocking / blacklisting it? \$\endgroup\$ – Null Mar 24 at 12:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Remove it at first, blacklist it the moment it pops up again, I guess. I've heard outright blacklisting on the first run isn't done often, but I'm not against it. The tag by itself is too ambiguous. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast Mar 24 at 12:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mast A moderator can make it a synonym whereas we need a CM to blacklist it. Since we can make it a synonym (it's almost always used for op amp questions) it seems better to do that. \$\endgroup\$ – Null Mar 24 at 13:18
  • \$\begingroup\$ It's definitely easier, but again, there's the risk of mistagging. After all, operaitonal by itself is meaningless. It should never be used as a tag. I don't think the tag should exist at all, even if we know what was intended 95% of the time. Let people type a couple more characters and figure out the rest (considering there's an auto-complete function, it's barely any extra effort at all). \$\endgroup\$ – Mast Mar 24 at 15:25
  • \$\begingroup\$ "Let people type a couple more characters and figure out the rest (considering there's an auto-complete function, it's barely any extra effort at all)." Therein lies the problem -- many users put no effort into tagging correctly. By making it a synonym, a user who types "operational amplifier" will cause the question to be tagged [operational-amplifier] and [amplifier], which are generally both correct for questions about op amps. \$\endgroup\$ – Null Mar 24 at 15:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ I don't understand this, there's just 2 old questions with the tag. In case there was a clean-up effort, then why were these 2 left alone? Or in case there was no clean-up effort, it's just 2 questions. Edit those into shape and the tag will be gone. \$\endgroup\$ – Lundin Mar 29 at 10:33

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .