What is considered to be a good frequency to do a tag clean up? I've initiated something like that two years ago with Geoff Oxberry.

Actions to be considered:

  1. Identify misspelled tags and correct them
  2. Identify equivalent tags, select the most appropriate one and retag the others (this includes different spellings of packages like "numpy" and "NumPy")
  3. Identify very little used tags and, if possible, merge them in large scope tags

  4. Review descriptions of the tags

  5. Tag untagged questions with at least one tag

Do you think this should be systematically organized (every year?) or should this evolve "organically".

To do this efficiently, it would be nice to be able to access a csv list of the tag database (tag name, tag count, tag description).

  • $\begingroup$ Currently there are not untagged questions. $\endgroup$
    – nicoguaro Mod
    May 2, 2019 at 17:05

2 Answers 2


I think that a systematic, periodical review of the tags is a good idea. I wouldn't mind joining a yearly community effort (guided by one or more of the moderators) to clean up the tags. I think at least items 1 and 2 of my list above should be done regularly.


Let's start this month. This time, I want to see how much activity will we have in terms of:

  • suggestions
  • up/downvotes
  • discussion in the form of comments

I also created a Query on DataSE to find tag stats usage in order to identify potentially (!) poor tags. Let's still not read it directly: if the tag currently has only 2 usages does not mean it has to be eliminated. There are other criteria.

After completing June 2019 clean-up and closer to the end of the year we'll decide if we need this activity in some form twice a year, annually, or just occasionally.

The other thing that would help, is having the community suggestion for tag revision. It can be done:

  • in a separate meta post. We have plenty of those, and some discussions were quite useful to determine the right course of action.
  • in a combined post as an answer: this old post on tag mergers and synonims can still serve us.

Both options are good in my opinion.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ One of the purposes to answer here explicitly is to get @GertVdE 's attention :) $\endgroup$
    – Anton Menshov Mod
    Jun 5, 2019 at 2:19
  • $\begingroup$ you've got it ;-) $\endgroup$
    – GertVdE
    Jun 5, 2019 at 8:36

You must log in to answer this question.

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