I will add that when creating the tag scottish-book, the tag creator also created the tag-excerpt and the tag-wiki.

Both fact - that the user created the tag-info and that they started adding the tag only slowly, not to many question at once - are appreciated. (We have een many tag-creators who ignore tag-wiki. And sometimes the new tag is added to a large number of questions at once.)

On the other hand, it might have been better to ask on meta first whether the new tag would be considered suitable. There are some suggestions for creation tags in Help improve tagging!. Some other examples of the posts where creation of a tag was suggested: adding n cat lab tag or “Singular Perturbation” is not among tags.

Just as an example, the tag continuum-theory was created probably by Taras Banakh in August. But already some time before that, creation of this tag has been suggested on meta.

Here are two more examples of posts asking about creation of a new tag: Should we create an Erdos tag? and Tag for errata of books.

@MartinSleziak I have received no feedback on this here in chat. So I have added at least a top-level tag and asked in a comment for suggestions about the choice of tags.

To get back to the issue discussed above, meta tags were mentioned a few times.

> (3) A few tags are not thematic, and are rather a qualifier on the question. The most used are probably reference-request and soft-question, less used and possibly more questionable examples, counterexamples, etc

And from Mike Miller's answer:

> Third, this is a meta tag, which does not actually give content about the mathematics of the post (but rather the metamathematics of where the question originated). It is my recollection that there is agreement these should be avoided, but I couldn't find a discussion of this in a quick search.

I have mentioned the "meta-tags" a few times in the comments. However, the references for discussions I found (and linked) were not on MO.

There is the blog post: The Death of Meta Tags

I have also mentioned in a comment these posts: The “meta-tags”. (Mathematics Meta) and What makes a tag “meta” and are such tags inappropriate? (Meta Stack Exchange).

Were "meta-tags" previously discussed on MathOverflow meta or tea (the old meta)? If yes, can somebody find a link to those threads?

Hi @TarasBanakh, nice to see you here!

I hope you do not take discussion on meta personally - it is important to have good tag-system, so it is quite natural that if there is a new tag which might be problematic, then there is a discussion about that tag.

I have already said that, but I'll just repeat that I appreciate that you took time to create the tag-excerpt and tag-wiki - many users ignore the tag-info when they create a new tag.

And also it is nice that you were careful enough and decided to add the tag only slowly, not to large number of posts at the same time.

As I've mentioned in a comment, if one of the things you want to achieve is to have questions coming from the Lviv Scottish book easily accessible in a single place - even if some of them might be posted from different accounts - one possibility to create a list like that would be using favorites.

I see that there were several users notifying Taras Banakh about the meta thread independently of each other:

So I can imagine he might have felt a bit overwhelmed - getting so many notifications about the same issue.

specific-question This question was recently bumped: Is there an unambiguous CFL whose complement is not context-free? So it is a good opportunity to remove one occurrence of the deprecated (discrete-mathematics) tag. But I have hard time thinking of a top-level tag for this question. (Of course, other improvements of the tags on this question are more then welcome, too.)

@MartinSleziak I have added the two tags I've mentioned. The question is still missing a top-level tag - and any further improvements to the choice of tags are more than welcome.