I would say no, it should not be legal. The puzzle should be entirely contained within the post, and the tags act as descriptors. Even the idea of temporarily withholding tags (which has been previously discussed) had a mixed reaction.
Puzzling.SE is still primarily supposed to be a Q&A site. Even though we stray from that in one aspect doesn't mean we ...
I think it's way too early to go creating a new tag. Popular puzzles with a relatively simple construction frequently spawn a wave of similar "inspired by" puzzles. The majority of times this wave dies down naturally after a couple of days/weeks. So prematurely creating a new tag for something that may end up only pointing to the set of riddles ...
Just to present another opinion: Yes, there should be a riley-riddle tag.
The average self-made "Riley riddle" is of significantly higher quality than the average self-made beginner riddle on the site. For example, because of the triple wordplay, every riley-riddle is pretty much guaranteed to have a unique solution. Also, given the fixed format for the ...
No we do not need the tag
While pokemon is quite a broad subject, it is still too specific
Pokemon can relate to many things, but can be replaced for each one:
Pokemon video games replaced with video-games
Pokemon movies replaced with movies
Pokemon TV series replaced with tv
Pokemon Card Game replaced with cards
Pokemon Go replaced with video-games (Or ...
I'm sure that at least one other notable puzzler would agree, that:
iq-test should be removed
It has 41 questions, out of which 6 are closed and 2 duplicate
The tag does describe a specific genre of questions, however IMO these questions don't really contribute to the Puzzling community that much (then again I'm only a 4k user and haven't ...
(Much of this answer comes from a discussion in chat with Rubio, Brandon_J, and North.)
I see several problems with the "open-ended" format. But first, a definition, to make sure we're all on the same page:
An open-ended question is one where multiple answers are expected; answers are ranked by some sort of rule, and the answer with ...
Yes, of course we should "allow" reuse of topic ideas.
And i don't think we need to impose any restrictions (i.e. minimum gap between repeats). If people want three chess fortnights in a row, they'll vote for it, if not, the subsequent repeat suggestions will be down voted (that's kind of the idea of voting).
In fact, I think we should loosen the ...
As with Rubio's suggestion, we leave out the word logic to avoid confusion with 'logic-grids'.
I feel like this is a bit more descriptive, as what are we doing in these puzzles but deducing the state of a grid? I tried thinking about what these had in common, and really, they are puzzles where we deduce the state of a grid.
A tag like beginner or low-rep-users is what would be considered a meta-tag. Meta-tags are generally frowned up on on Stack Exchange; tags are meant to describe the content of a question as opposed to information about the question.
I think what you did is sufficient, and if you clearly label the question as "beginners only", a tag shouldn't be necessary.
I totally agree that the specific example you linked should be tagged knowledge (in fact, I've edited it in). In this instance, it could even have been music, but that may be too much of a hint, and I don't mind people using slightly more ambiguous versions of tags to help hide information, just not complete omission. However, your more general question is a ...
This has long been an issue for me. When I ask a knowledge/trivia question, or when I'm helping another user with tag edits on their question, I often have no idea which of the two tags to use, and often choose at random or use both interchangeably. That's a big red flag that we don't actually need two separate tags.
The names and descriptions of the two ...
If you don't want to show what kind puzzle you want to use, consider using the enigmatic-puzzles tag. If you make the question look mathy, it could still be lateral-thinking. Still, I think that even this may not be the best idea.
However, I also think that it is a bad idea to intentionally use the wrong tags.
In the interests of providing options:
We should get rid of the joke tag entirely.
Most of the questions with this tag are either already closed, or not very funny (obviously subjective). I don't think the tag really serves a useful purpose, and it should probably just get burninated.
I don't think we need this tag.
Although I'm willing to be convinced if you can elaborate on this:
it does class a particular type of puzzles
What type of puzzles? As far as I can see, it describes a particular context in which puzzles can be set, which doesn't equate to a type of puzzle. Flavour text is most often irrelevant, and puzzles about ...
Including broad tags along with specific ones makes filtering content much easier. It is hard to imagine anyone wanting to search for, e.g., "all math puzzles except puzzles involving probability, combinatorics, arithmetic, geometry, number sequences, ...", whereas a search for "all math puzzles" seems quite reasonable. I think it makes sense to include all ...
Yes, let's use this tag more.
There's a valid and clearly defined type of puzzle here, so it does merit a special tag. And there is a tag already; people just haven't been using it properly. Let's fix that.
Going forward, let's make sure all new word ladder puzzles are tagged with word-ladder. Older questions which need the tag might be harder to find, but ...
I'm not sure that "deserve" is the right word, but IMO tags are useful for bandwagons for three (related) reasons:
They allow people who find one question to find the rest.
They allow people who enjoy them to mark the tag as favourite.
They allow people who dislike either the particular bandwagon or bandwagons in general to ignore them.
I agree that a tag for these riddles should be created. Not judging those who do, but I don't enjoy these particular puzzles, and I currently am filtering out the riddle tag so as not to clutter up my front page. I do enjoy riddles in the more classic form, and would appreciate differentiation so I could filter out just the substring riddles.
Well, if you want data here is a query that returns the average time (in hours) it takes to get an accepted answer by tag (filtering out any tags with less than 10 accepted answers)...
However (and I think it's a pretty big however), that data is probably largely meaningless, because:
It ignores puzzles which have no accepted answers, which in turn ignores ...
I can't speak for the entire community here, but I'll tell you what I think.
Is find-the-tag a meta tag?
In the post about meta tags, Jeff Atwood makes two points on what is considered a meta tag:
If the tag can’t work as the only tag on a question, it’s probably a meta-tag.
If the tag commonly means different things to different people, it’s probably a ...
A little discussion needed on this one before it can be done. idioms and proverbs has been created by the same user and have 2 and 1 questions tagged respectively. Can we dump these tags and instead tag them with trivia? Since I believe that solving these two questions requires knowledge of idioms and proverbs, the umbrella of trivia is enough.
What is an open-ended puzzle?
If we're going to declare these off-topic, then let's have a clear definition so that the policy doesn't get misapplied. Deusovi has attempted to do this in his answer above, but I want to make it even clearer. (The reason for this answer is that I've already seen discussion over how/where it should apply, and I want to avoid a ...
2019-07-04: still at 34 tags, 128 questions to go. Progress rate was 6 questions in 7 days.
2019-07-26: still at 34 tags, 94 questions to go. Progress rate was 34 questions in 22 days. Down to double digits!
2019-08-19: We've hit 35 tags! Well done, number-theory! 81 questions to go. Progress rate was 13 questions in 24 days. (The other tags need to step ...
I'm against this change: it's unnecessary, and would be actively harmful.
"Graph theory" is the name of the field of mathematics that studies those graphs. We have number-theory and combinatorics as well; both of those tags are for puzzles relating to those fields. Why should we introduce an inconsistency?
Additionally, graphs could be misinterpreted as "...
I just took a look at our tag blacklist, and it has this:
Turns out that really means (^puzzling)|(puzzles?$), which blacklists any tag that starts with "puzzling" or ends with "puzzle" or "puzzles." Definitely not the intent.
I've poked an employee in chat to fix this for us.
I don't think this would be a good idea at all.
It's a meta-tag
It is complicated and not easily understood by newcomers, and will hence be mis-used all the time. (Your distinctions between when-to-use and when-not-to-use are not very intuitive or 'sharp' )
It is not possible to "do" anything with this tag. As you don't know which ...