6
$\begingroup$

Alright, now that this site's existence appears to be secured, we could spend some time "cleaning it up".

How about we gather some duplicate tags in the answer and decide on whether they are really duplicates (through comments and up/downvoting)? Don't know how the second phase works, perhaps moderators know more about efficient retagging of questions (that doesn't involve manually editing every single question).

Can we please also be aggressive on down votes? If you dislike a tag-merge, dont just ignore that post. Downvote it.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ In response to how stage 2 should be handled: the appropriate mechanism is to create a tag synonym. This has the effect that anyone trying to use the old (deleted) tag in the future will see it automatically mapped into the main tag. Anyone with a rep over 1250 should be able to create synonyms. You can see our current tag synonyms here: economics.stackexchange.com/tags/synonyms $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Commented Jul 11, 2015 at 19:19
  • $\begingroup$ Perhaps someone could post a comment under any answer for which they have executed the relevant tag synonym so that we can keep track of which tags have and have not been merged. $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Commented Jul 11, 2015 at 19:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ on the top of tags, it might be worth considering deleting some tags, some are very very specific and couldn't be that helpful. nobel-prize and noises stand out as particularly useless. $\endgroup$
    – Jamzy
    Commented Jul 13, 2015 at 4:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Jamzy perhaps you start a new question for that? This already feels somewhat croweded. $\endgroup$
    – FooBar
    Commented Jul 14, 2015 at 8:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Ubiquitous I can see the synonyms, but where can I create them? $\endgroup$
    – FooBar
    Commented Jul 14, 2015 at 8:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @FooBar Here is the information page on tag synonyms: economics.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/…. It seems that non-moderator users can only propose synonyms for tags on which they have submitted answers with five or more upvotes in aggregate. $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Commented Jul 14, 2015 at 10:50

10 Answers 10

Reset to default
6
$\begingroup$

predatory-dumping and dumping could be merged.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

development (9 questions) and development-economics (4 questions).

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

I suggest welfare and welfare-economics to be merged, as they're pretty much the same thing (or, even if not, they're being used interchangeable in the questions so far)

$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

bitcoin should be linked into cryptocurrency. All questions I have seen on the former are about general principles that apply to all of the latter, and I believe bitcoin is too narrow to warrant a separate tag.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

pricing and price-theory also look like natural candidates to me

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Do you have a view on which should be kept? $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Commented Jul 27, 2015 at 7:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Ubiquitous I think price-theory should be kept. Pricing sounds too similar to asset-pricing etc. At further thought, perhaps pricing belongs into asset-pricing, we should look at the older questions. $\endgroup$
    – FooBar
    Commented Jul 27, 2015 at 8:23
  • $\begingroup$ Right, that was my thought too. But this raises the question of whether we should create a tag synonym and map pricing into price-theory (and risk mis-applying the price theory tag to things that might not traditionally fall under that rubric), or to simply delete the pricing tag and risk it reappearing. I am leaning towards the tag synonym solution, but it seems that right now pricing is not being used to label only things that would usually fit under price-theroy. $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Commented Jul 27, 2015 at 10:17
3
$\begingroup$

Money Supply (1 follower, 31 questions) and money (1 follower, 11 questions) appear to be good candidates. I dont think there's many potential (ontopic) questions where you'd tag only one and not the other.

Hence I suggest adding the tag Money Supply wherever Money is, and then deleting the Money tag.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ There is a literature related to money that I wouldn't classify as Money Supply (Maybe others would classify it as Money Supply? I'm thinking of papers in the vein of Kiyotaki Wright 1991 and am happy to hear differing opinions). If these were to merge then my vote would be to keep it as money instead of Money Supply. $\endgroup$
    – cc7768
    Commented Jul 13, 2015 at 14:17
3
$\begingroup$

Finance (60 questions) and Financial-economics (33 questions) are also potential candidates, but it isn't as clear here. Perhaps someone with more expertise on the subject wants to comment here.

As a third one, Financial-markets (15 questions) comes to mind. Some Financial-markets questions could be relabeled as asset-pricing, and the remainder with financial-economics (or, in case they really are just about market economics, with something completely different).

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

producer-surplus is quite narrow, perhaps it belongs within producer-theory?

$\endgroup$
-2
$\begingroup$

'International-trade' (26) and 'International-economics' (19).

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I disagree with this one. International Trade is only a part of International Economics, focusing on trade issues. International Economics cover also things like exchange rates, financial flows, production factor mobility etc. $\endgroup$
    – Alecos Papadopoulos
    Commented Oct 9, 2015 at 2:55
  • $\begingroup$ @AlecosPapadopoulos I would also include these things in International Trade because they are so closely related processes. The Krugman book discusses production factor mobility in "Part 1: International Trade Theory". However yours seems to be the majority opinion so I am probably not familiar with the convention. $\endgroup$
    – Giskard
    Commented Oct 9, 2015 at 6:05
-5
$\begingroup$

continuous-time (12 questions) and time-series (31 questions).

a lot of overlap here.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Perhaps de-facto overlap (through misuse), but at least in theory, these two are fundamentally different area. $\endgroup$
    – FooBar
    Commented Oct 11, 2015 at 17:11

You must log in to answer this question.

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