I propose establishing orthodox as a synonym for eastern-orthodox, which can be voted for (or against) here.
I would propose removing the greek-orthodox tag and placing the four (4) posts tagged this way under the eastern-orthodox tag. Otherwise this opens up the possibility of separate tags for every national jurisdiction of Eastern Orthodoxy (one for ...
Synonym proposal: augustine (7 questions), st-augustine-of-hippo (2 questions), augustine-of-hippo (2 questions).
Based on the question count, augustine seems a good candidate for the authoritative name.
(wax eagle caught the first tag; I did not notice that duplicate when browsing tags.)
As far as I can figure, pretty much any time there would be a meaningful distinction to be made between the two it's reasonable to expect the question and answers to specifically delineate their own scope—as far as a general taxonomy of topics go I don't see a problem with them being lumped together.
If there was a substantial amount of expertise that ...
I think in principle they have different meanings, though "Church history" is certainly a subset of all history. But if we can't rely on people to know the difference - it's certainly not obvious, when asking a question, that these separate options are available - then we should just merge them.
Our history questions are generally about finding out what ...
I know that's in the style guide, but how much "real world traction" does it have? Are people actually going to type it? (doesn't matter with synonyms, but you do see it on the main page)
Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of American Christianity knows LDS is Mormons. Church of Jesus Christ sounds much more like Church of Christ (which someone else has ...
I suggest separate tags for "custom" and "tradition".
Custom should be for established habitual practices, which may at times be elevated to some higher formal status, but don't inherently carry authority. They may be an important part of culture, but are not essential to faith.
Tradition should be for the part of the "deposit of faith" not otherwise ...
In this case we need to have the tag wiki summary be position neutral and the tag wiki to have information regarding the uses for each of the movements that will use the tag.
So the tag wiki summary should read:
Historical teachings and practices. This tag is used differently in the catholic and protestant churches, see the full wiki for the differences.
It's normal to have separate tags for bible-books and people. In that case I believe the proper tags should be 1-peter 2-peter and peter, with peter-apostle merged into peter. 3 of the 5 questions tagged 'peter' are about the man.
These should be separate tags, and I've proposed some tag wiki edits to make the difference clear.
A further tag to consider is early-church. Currently its description says 200. Is that the best date for the tag? Would it be useful to have a tag for the NT era church?
Anglicanism is a church tradition, just like Presbyterianism and Baptist. The Church of England and the Episcopalian church are national denominations in the Anglican tradition. In general we don't use tags for individual denominations, so I think they should be merged into anglicanism.
Episcopal technically means a church with bishops, but the only ...
I approved bible-basis -> biblical-basis and book-of-genesis -> genesis as these are good synonyms correcting small mistags. I'm less sure about the others.
To address each: divinity -> god seems like a poor synonym to me. Even though they have similar meanings, it does not seem wise to merge them at this time.
On pneumatology -> holy-spirit I'd actually ...
As large and with as clearly defined different Baptist groups are I think I could make a good case for them being broken out. That being said with one question each I think the lone tags can simply be removed and some other useful taxonomy employed. I do not see the need for a synonym at this time.
I think that we should avoid hyphenating things that will be regularly occurring so my vote is that we go for revelation as the parent and book-of-revelation to be the child tag.
There is the potential that folks might want to use revelation for the concept of God speaking to man. however, I suggest that these folks may want to be more specific and identify ...
Mason already took care of the merge, and apparently the rename to doctrine-and-covenants. How both of the previous tags managed to have the wrong plural I have no idea.
I also removed the tag from a couple questions where it seemed to be miss-placed on questions about either doctrine or covenants but not Doctrine and Covenants
You need five rep in a tag to suggest a synonym. Three other people who also have five rep then vote on it in a hidden place of the site which they probably won't see. On smaller sites like this it's almost impossible to get synonyms approved.
Mods can more easily make synonyms, but most of the time synonyms aren't worth dealing with. Instead just retag all ...
Both calvinism and reformed-theology exist, but should probably be merged. I read this blog post today which shows the difference between calvinism and reformed theology. The author actually recommends calling it Dortism! I wouldn't, no one else calls it that. But when you look at what has been tagged with both tags they're almost all about soteriology. So ...
Should adam be a synonym for adam-and-eve? (There is no 'eve' tag.)
Several questions using adam actually seem to be a better fit for adam-and-eve, e.g.:
Did God create Adam and Eve with free will and knowledge of right and wrong (good and evil)?
Why did the devil tempt Eve first?
Why is it a sin to eat an apple?
Why is the curse of original sin not ...
They are not intended to be synonyms
Peter is intended to be the book of peter and peter-apostle is intended to be about the man, though that's not at all clear from the tag wikis(and in fact that wiki for Peter indicates it's for the apostle which is not the case).
I agree there should be only one tag. Which one? That will depend on which questions the tag is used for.
I suspect it would be most useful when discussing the canonicity of additional texts in the restorationist movements - if you're talking only about the standard Bible then the bible tag is sufficient. The questions would be along the lines of "What ...
I agree with your answer for the most part, but it's basically the status quo anyway. Some questions were just mistagged, and I've retagged the john and apostle-john questions to john-apostle, since he's the one they were about. I've also submitted a tag wiki to make matthew's scope explicit.
Here's where I have minor disagreements with your answer: