I just noticed (when asking a question) that we might have an issue with using the tag "john". It is too vague, since it could be used for multiple reasons. I suggest we ban it and replace it with one of these:

  • john-book
  • john-apostle
  • 1-john
  • 2-john
  • 3-john
  • john-the-baptist

Does the community agree?

  • 1
    Great idea. Some of those are already in use.
    – jimreed
    Commented Aug 25, 2011 at 20:51
  • How does that work for the user who tries using "john" as the tag? I do agree, though. It'd help when trying to find questions on a specific John.
    – a_hardin
    Commented Aug 25, 2011 at 20:52
  • I kinda like the tag john.... Commented Aug 27, 2011 at 2:01

3 Answers 3


I would suggest that instead of "john-book" we use . In fact this could be done for all the four gospels. and , etc.

  • 3
    +1 for gospel-of-foo tags.
    – Flimzy
    Commented Aug 25, 2011 at 21:46
  • 3
    +1 me too on gospel-of tags (but who is foo? :-) :-)
    – user116
    Commented Aug 28, 2011 at 0:57
  • @Ollie. Foo is a metasyntactic variable.
    – TRiG
    Commented Aug 30, 2011 at 22:26
  • 6
    @user116 The Gospel of Foo is a lesser-known apocryphal gospel. Commented Feb 23, 2012 at 21:36
  • Can I suggest "john-gospel" as a tag (possibly a synonym) so that when people start typing "john" they get "john-gospel" as a suggestion. Commented Feb 23, 2012 at 21:37
  • 1
    @djclayworth nice thinking but the SE engine already shows and completes tags starting after dash breaks so such hacking for function is unnecessary. We can go ahead and just optimize for readability.
    – Caleb
    Commented Feb 23, 2012 at 23:18

The easy way to do this is to synonymize with (meaning the former will be replaced with the latter when used). If incorrect tagging becomes a problem, we could look at banning it of course, but at this early stage it seems like this will be the most likely use for it.


Wait a sec though. I know you didn't suggest this, but if we synonomize with , then we might be making distinctions that scholarly types like to make, I but find to be a little disenchanting.

Can we just not go down that road?

If we can't ban the John tag, we can at least make it a policy to retag it right?

  • 3
    Retag it according to the content of the question. Hopefully it would be clear from that which John(s) was(were) intended...
    – Shog9
    Commented Aug 26, 2011 at 22:42

You must log in to answer this question.

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