Take the 2-minute tour ×
Stack Apps is a question and answer site for apps, scripts, and development with the Stack Exchange API. It's 100% free, no registration required.

We currently have three tags that are essentially the same thing -- especially in a stackapps context. They are , , and .

is one of the "required tags" and has a nice wiki. From its wiki and description blurb:

User scripts for Stack Exchange sites that modify the site's behavior in the web browser. These scripts usually run in IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, and Safari.

The tag is clearly about userscripts. This strongly suggests that the is redundant.

The tag has no wiki, only has 39 questions, and all but 5 of those questions are tagged with also. Of those 5, every one clearly fits the tag.

Please make "user-script" a synonym of the tag.


The tag only has two questions and both of those clearly should be tagged instead.

Please make "scripts" a synonym of the tag.


Per the stackapps about page "This site supports the API". So all other meanings of "scripts" or "user-scripts" are either not relevant or fall under the tag (plus, possibly, language-specific tags). (So far there have been no exceptions anyway).


Notes:

  • I believe that only a moderator or dev can do this, since there are not enough power-users on stackapps for the normal synonym process.
  • Per this moderator's answer, this is the recommended place to ask this kind of question.

    Stack Apps is for supporting the API, which includes meta discussion about it.

share|improve this question
    
It's redundant if there's no need for a tag to relate to userscripts without the actual content of the question being a post for a userscript, which I'm not positive of. I will take a closer look sometime this evening, though. –  Tim Stone Jun 22 '13 at 1:46
add comment

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Okay, I didn't quite do what you wanted, but hopefully you'll find the solution I came up with acceptable.

is now a synonym of , and I went through and retagged all questions that were about userscripts (but weren't posts intending to make a script available) with just .

Admittedly the distinction may not be immediately obvious to users, but given the low traffic it should be fairly easy to enforce. I will add a description on in a bit to try and clarify things.

share|improve this answer
    
Well, that's better than it was before. Thanks! –  Brock Adams Jun 22 '13 at 20:10
1  
It might be clearer if "scripts" was renamed "scripting". "scripts" could be a synonym of that, just in case. –  Brock Adams Jun 24 '13 at 9:48
    
I went ahead and suggested the wiki edits. Trying to be helpful; let me know if it was annoying instead. –  Brock Adams Jun 24 '13 at 9:54
    
Hmm, yeah, I'll think on the name. I went with the plural form because it's what Jeff used in the faq post, but that doesn't mean it's most appropriate. I also went and approved your edits, thanks a lot for that! –  Tim Stone Jun 25 '13 at 15:38
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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