9

Right now we have , , and . None of them have very many questions, but I still hesitate to eliminate two of them without a bit of discussion. Here are the kinds of questions in, um, question:

Some of the other questions associated with these tags may not actually need it, but it seems to me that one tag of this type is worth keeping. Which one?

4
  • 2
    I would question whether the questions in question are questions that raise a question about the site's taxonomy of questions.
    – Caleb
    Nov 5, 2015 at 7:39
  • 4
    non-christians would probably be the best tag. unbelievers generally still believe things, and unsaved is a judgement call that should be avoided in tags if possible.
    – curiousdannii Mod
    Nov 5, 2015 at 7:52
  • It would strictly leave the ridiculous self-identified 'atheist Christians' out of the group referred to by the tag, but there are so few questions about them it doesn't matter.
    – curiousdannii Mod
    Nov 5, 2015 at 7:53
  • @curiousdannii Technically I think all three of them would exclude 'atheist Christians' since they describe themselves as 'Christian.' So to tag such questions we should use the existing athiest tag or a new atheist-christian tag if the need arises.
    – Nathaniel is protesting
    Nov 5, 2015 at 13:18

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
8

We should keep , as it is the most specific of the three, rename it to (plural), and the others should be made synonyms of it.

4
  • While I agree that non-christian should be the preferred term & will be applicable in most contexts, the other terms have a different shade of meaning that may be more applicable in certain contexts. eg: "Certain Evangelicals believe that it's possible to be a 'Christian' and yet unsaved, what is the basis for such a belief?" etc.
    – bruised reed
    Nov 5, 2015 at 4:36
  • 1
    @bruisedreed Such a distinction would be perfectly fine for a question title or body to build on, but as far as a taxonomy goes I think it's fair enough to tag all such questions with the same tag.
    – Caleb
    Nov 5, 2015 at 7:41
  • I agree, but think the plural non-christians would be best.
    – curiousdannii Mod
    Nov 5, 2015 at 7:52
  • 1
    @curiousdannii Not sure if this is a trivial enough update to be included in this answer, but I'm hoping so. Non-christians it is.
    – Nathaniel is protesting
    Nov 5, 2015 at 12:00

You must log in to answer this question.

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