Haven't spotted one in ages but now along comes .

But maybe it's better just to merge it into ?

If not then please could a mod rename it to ?

(Can't do it myself since the system has smarts to detect singular-plural variants that ain't so smart in cases like this.)

  • 1
    I think it's fine to merge them. Agree. Question is how did it get in there? Unless there's a non-biometric-passport tag there's no symmetry and 'passports' gets diluted with both meanings. And biometric-passports will cover generic passport questions. Messy. Unclear about how it got in there in the first place.
    – Gayot Fow
    May 19, 2015 at 11:16
  • Created by one of the last questions about biometric passport. Probably the one regarding extracting the picture from the passport chip.
    – JoErNanO Mod
    May 19, 2015 at 11:59
  • @JoErNanO, presumably then it travelled through the standard SO darwinian process. Probably not worth all the trouble, but it DOES create asymmetry unless the community is vigilant about tags on new questions.
    – Gayot Fow
    May 19, 2015 at 12:18
  • The SO darwinian process takes time to eliminate weak genes. It's still faster than biological evolution though. :) I fully agree it creates asymmetry and should be merged or at least renamed.
    – JoErNanO Mod
    May 19, 2015 at 12:50

2 Answers 2


->. Added the synonym as well.

Somehow this slipped through the cracks, sorry about that.


was probably created by the same user, since currently the two questions tagged [tag:biometric-passport] belong to him. I fully agree that it creates asymmetry with other plural tags, and should probably be merged with . Failing that it should at least be renamed .

You must log in to answer this question.

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