First of all:   Now the question substance:  Is there an accepted channel for an unprivileged user to request the addition of a tag? If so, what is it? If not, is there a reason for its non-existence, and if so what is that reason?
122478
I'd like to post a question on StackOverflow, but I think I should be able to tag it with    . Poor me, there is no  tag; There is  and , I'm certainly not sure this is the right thing to do, so figure I'll start here.  Edit Question located here:
96864
Now that the , I've been seeing tag-only suggested edits from 1500-rep users.  For example, one had the summary of 'burninating [tagThatWasRemoved]'.  It's very tempting to reject these as Too Minor, but I know that these users used to have a Retag privilege (and are obviously trying to participate in a burnination.)  What should we do for tag-only edits from high(er) rep users?
5180
From this quote from , referring to the recent mass retagging here:  It left questions untagged. Yeah, it's meta, so there's required tags but those required tags are meta tags... literally. If a question doesn't have any tags other than the required tag, it's untagged! We don't prevent this, but maybe we should.  Do you agree with the point of view that questions here only consisting of required tags are effectively untagged? Should we prevent questions here on meta from only having one or more of the required tags , , , or ? I'm neutral about it; I just want to see what others think.
34497
I just made some minor edits to the text of .  I didn't edit the tags at all.  When I completed my edits, my edit showed as:    Now, I think those tags were present before I started my edit, and so were probably slipped in by the OP in their edit grace window.  I have no problem with that tagging, but I don't like seeing edits attributed to me that I didn't make.  So, what the heck?
11979
Note: I'm not requesting that this be changed; I'm asking a neutral question as well as starting a discussion.  I'm aware that in order for users to be notified upon their question being edited, the edit has to be substantive enough, and that simply editing the tags of a question won't result in a notification.  Occasionally, I've seen staff members here add in a status tag without making any answer or comment, or substantive edit. As such an edit is tag-only, users aren't notified of the decision of their bug report or feature request if the staff member or moderator opts to go this route.  Is there a reason why this is the case? Was this considered when the decision was made to not notify in any case if the only edit is a retag, even if it involves moderator-only tags? If so, why was it decided to not notify the user regarding the decision of their request in this case?  If not, should users be notified if a moderator edits a status tag without providing an answer, comment, or substantive edit?
84028
Question description  There are many questions (~250 in the last five weeks) relating to      sometimes they are about licensing, legal issues, , , , etc.  These questions relate to the same growing polarization between community and Stack&nbsp;Exchange staff. But, it is not easy to search or filter them because the tags are not uniform for those questions, they do not have the same tags.  Could we group all these posts together by some common tag (new or not)? (in addition, maybe we should create less of these questions, they tend to become noise now, water down the core message, and it is ).    Relevance  Overview of current tags (aside from the discussion tag) for the first ten  (           ) questions relating to  (ordered by relevance)                              1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10     moderators              x           x   x   x     community               x           x   x     etiquette                   x     users                       x     company                     x     moderation                      x     code-of-conduct                     x       x       x     deleted-questions                               x     legal                                                   x   These tags are obviously not the same while it is arguably the same topic (it is even for the same, specific, search term) .  Instead of using multiple searches one might wish to control tracking these question by adding some single relevant tag to watched tags or ignore tags. But, this is difficult when they do not use the same tag. And in the case of ignoring one might ignore too much when the tag is not specific.  Another indicator that these posts need consistent tagging is the fact that there exist highly upvoted answers that function as an archive for these questions (see  and ). But it is only a hack/workaround for the absence of a common tag; they are not an optimal solution.    Why now?  In an older question () it was suggested to create a specific tag. That was rejected at that point. But, now we are several weeks, and many many questions, further. The situation is more escalated than what might have foreseen at that point. The overview becomes a mess and something needs to be done.  See the bump in the image below which indicates that something is 'going on' and it entails a large fraction of the current post. (obtained from )
101799
I recently  and someone edited my message, but all they did was reorder the tags I had already used.   (Edit: they did actually correct one, I just noticed)  Is there any benefits to the order in which you add tags? personally I thought there wasn't any weighting?
105357
Possible Duplicate:          I just tried to edit the tags of  to add the  tag to it (since the feature is already present), but every time I submit the edit I get dumped back to the edit page again.  Is this a moderator only tag (i.e. only moderators can apply it? Does the same apply to the other  tags?
106961
I attempted to ask a question using the iOS app, but it was rejected due to lack of a required tag. On adding the tag I found that I wasn't permitted to submit the question for another 60 seconds, even though this wasn't a new question.  Is this timer intentional, or should it not kick in for edits of questions not actually accepted by the site?
117439
I was trying to ask a question, but the tag I wanted to use doesn't exist. How can I suggest a new tag?   I want to make this tag, but I think my reputation is not high enough to suggest a tag. How can I still suggest one to Stack Overflow in such a situation?
11435
I want to know how to create a new tag on Stack Overflow. Where is the entrance of this function?   Please post a screenshot for me. Thanks a lot.
48138
Meanwhile, in August 2009  as reason for comment flagging, and the comment flags show in the 10k tools. And  is on its way. Hence: I don't care for this request myself anymore. An explicit [status-declined] would be fine.    What about being able to set comments to auto-expire? Or, alternatively, set a comment to be removable by the author of the question or answer one comments on?  This way the communities would allow for some personal or funny comments (even like "Thanks") without those comments littering the sites forever. Or, when the original author is allowed to clean up, then comments that have been taken care of by editing the question or answer, could be removed.  Why?  As, , there's no way to send a personal message to other members, I find myself abusing the comments like some "poor man's private messaging system". I try to refrain from things like "Thank you", but sometimes I do want to point out something to someone. After a while (hours, days) I then  to remove them (hoping that no-one actually replied to them with another comment, like "Thanks, fixed it").  Like :    (I don't find this feature request very important (at all), I am quite impressed by what's been given us already, and I doubt there's a way to implement it without making things too confusing. Maybe I'm just trying too hard to keep things tidy and clean. Still, I wanted to share it, just in case someone comes up with something very clever...)
6681
See the revision history on , where the  tag was edited in (and subsequently edited out after I started this discussion).  I think, by adding this tag, you're making assumptions about the OP which they could find a little bit offensive.  Particularly with this question, there's no mention of the level of PHP knowledge — it's more a math question than it is a programming question. Someone could be excellent at a particular language whilst not being particularly great at math, so isn't it a bit insulting to make the assumption they're a beginner? It's also interesting to note  tag, which currently stands at 7,784 on SO.  Compare this to , which only has 18 questions, most of them being &quot;discussiony.&quot;  Why do users retag questions as &quot;beginner&quot; but not &quot;expert&quot;? UPDATE, , .  Related   (thanks @Ralph)
42044
I have previously tried asking questions as simply as possible but they have been blocked like in the following link    So owning up to my mistake I tried posting a detailed question but table tags are not available in here to format my sample dat ; so I went for images and alas it tells me that I need atleast a reputation of 10 to post images!   Please somebody help me to post my question.
18989
It looks like the  tag (later renamed to ) is a holdover from the pre-split days when this site was called Meta Stack Overflow and also served as the meta site for Stack Overflow (in addition to its current purpose). It was intended to disambiguate questions about the SE network as a whole from questions specifically about Stack Overflow (). It has nearly 1,500 uses, so it's too big to clean up manually. It looks like people are still using it on new questions, and I just saw a suggested edit that only added this tag. Since all questions here should be about Stack Exchange, can we burninate this, the ultimate meta tag?
78327
I just noticed . Hey! I'm there! But that's beside the point.  The point is that Nick Craver is there too. Nick seems to like really long tag names, so his profile shows up like this:    Akk! Diamonds everywhere!  It seems that the page is optimized for only two lines of tags per user. One tag per line means three lines. Three lines means that Nick's reputation (tag) is cut in half.  Let's not cut Nick's rep (tag) in half on the Users page, no?
84000
(As discussed ) Despite Jeff being against it, I suspect that people are going to carry on asking for private/direct messaging. The main reason invoked that I have seen is being able to send other people 'private' contact details. I think that if you satisfy that need, it might remove some of the strength of the demand. Idea: people could enter their contact details once in their profile, then you'd have a special syntax/button for making them visible to a specific user. (This is more of a feature-suggestion than a feature-request, but I didn't want to create another tag)