@OliverSalzburg After giving it another reading, I like your new tag cleanup procedure much better than the old one. However, it still needs a little improvement in that there may take too much time before a mod tags a tag cleanup request status-planned and certain requests may eventually become Tumbleweeds.

@OliverSalzburg In the old monthly tag cleanups, a day before we adopted the new tag cleanup procedure, I came up with a great suggestion for the existing tag cleanup: to separate those newly-created, little-used, easier-to-remove tags from the overused, older tags that needed more community effort to remove and @slhck endorsed it.

@OliverSalzburg We need to come up with some speedy cleanup criteria, which are some very specific criteria that allow a user to remove a tag if it unquestionably meets the criteria for being a meta tag, and fits into that former category.

@damryfbfnetsi There really isn't a need for a faster approval. There is enough work already queued up. And the process doesn't take long because moderators need to so long to apply the "planned" tag, but because the community needs enough time to judge the matter.

and we actually need to clean up tags

@OliverSalzburg What if you know about a tag that unquestionably is a meta tag, yet your tag cleanup request goes unnoticed for a while (or worse, becomes a Tumbleweed)?

@damryfbfnetsi Does it have views on Meta? Is it tagged properly (with discussion and tag-cleanup-request?

@OliverSalzburg Certain tags like kids (or sausage as you mentioned) obviously don't need community consensus to remove. Your procedure forces such tags to obtain community consensus before being able to clean them up

@damryfbfnetsi You can go ahead and remove tags like that without involving the community, yes. We give you tag editing powers for that reason - As long as you don't abuse the privileges.

@OliverSalzburg Wikipedia has its Criteria for Speedy Deletion for this purpose: they allow administrators to delete certain articles or other pages if they unquestionably meet certain criteria; otherwise, if someone thinks that the article or other page deserves deletion, but does not meet any one of the Criteria for Speedy Deletion, it must obtin deletion consensus through the Articles for Deletion process

@CanadianLuke But such edits will likely get rejected because reviewers don't see any relevant tag cleanup request; having speedy criteria to remove tags makes it more obvious to reviewers that they should instead approve such edits.

If there are useless tags like kids, then there is a 99.9% chance that other stuff could be cleaned up as well

@CanadianLuke It used to be that users with 0.5k+ rep could edit only the tags of a question and not have to go through the review, but the SE team removed this privilege because it became a problem on other sites

@damryfbfnetsi I know, I remember those days. But if the majority causes havoc for the site as a whole, they need to figure out a way around it. That's why it's community-reviewed

Do the edits, and let people vote if you don't have the rep.

@CanadianLuke I feel that the statistics that @Shog9 gave us on the request to raise the rep requirement for the tag cleanup privilege are rigged

I think most of the tags in that list that he gave were only the good tags sifted out of the whole mix

He did say 479 tags were destroyed during the same period of time, but I think that's cause we rapidly cleaned them up as they were being created

I think he should just try raising that rep requirement, and then revert it back to 300 if it becomes a big problem

@JourneymanGeek What do you think?

Even he admitted that the warning is weak sauce

I should also mention that there is now no warning to remove the untagged tag...so that should also be added to the speedy removal criteria.