Some time ago I made the tag because I saw the specific wording used as though it's the actual name of a specific type of visa for the UK. Basically the same way I made some visa tags, such as , , , , , etc. (Well, somebody other than me may have created some of them but I think it was me for each.)

What I was told at the time, was...

... inconsistent with the other tags because (1) it contains a country designation and (2) does not identify a specific type of visa like the other tags do.

Accordingly, this question presents an opportunity to harmonize visa tags under a consistent scheme...

  1. Get rid of the tag by merging it back into the tag?
  2. Rename the tag(s) to
  3. Do something else entirely?

  • We've been making tags as we go along since the very first day of the beta years ago. That's pretty long standing. We've had lots of community discussions about tags afterwards most of the time, when a problem was identified. Sometimes we also had discussions beforehand when problems were anticipated. I didn't anticipate any problems with any of the specific-visa tags before I made them. Now we do have lots of tag mess and we even have discussions about tags which have resulted in decisions... Commented Feb 12, 2016 at 11:54
  • ... And then the decisions never got implemented. So I don't know about these long-standing policies but we definitely have long-standing tagging problems. Commented Feb 12, 2016 at 11:54
  • Go edit it then as I expressly invited. I'm done being insulted. Commented Feb 14, 2016 at 2:06
  • Cleaned it up, edit completed.
    – Gayot Fow
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 8:43
  • 1
    Basically, even though I've reached middle age and travelled to sixty countries I'd never come across the term "visit visa" before seeing it being used repeatedly on this site, and only ever in combination with "UK". Googling a few other visa regions showed it to be very rarely used apart from the UK. I know guess it must be the British equivalent of what elsewhere people generally refer to as "tourist visa", more or less. I took it to be either the official or de facto specific name for a specific type of visa. In good faith. It's easy to rename, etc. Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 11:43
  • 1
    @hippietrail yes, and I think it's a very useful tag to regroup all those questions about uk tourist visas. There seems to be a lot of those lately.
    – drat
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 12:51
  • 1
    Liar! Stop putting words in my mouth!! I asked and you repeatedly and you insisted repeatedly that you did not have to tell me any reasons because you're a trusted user! All is recorded in the chat room logs. This is the most incredibly offensive behaviour directed at me since joining StackExchange. Insert the link from the chat log if you're not a liar. Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 15:06
  • Wow! At the time you created it, yes I explained my position. As I have many times. Ideas, suggestions, comments are invariably greeted with the same behaviour you are demonstrating now. It's not really a personal attack, nor does it warrant one.
    – Gayot Fow
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 18:07

2 Answers 2


I suggest the following:

Rename the tag into something more in line with the official names of the visa and the other tags, maybe ? The naming of this should probably be up to someone knows his way around with the names of the visas in the UK. (@Gayot Fow maybe?)

I am against the merging of the tag into , as there's fairly a lot of questions about UK visas popping up all the time, a lot of them being duplicates. Having the answers together under one tag, makes it much easier for users to find those existing questions and it also makes it easier for editors like me who are not so proficient in visa questions to find potential duplicate questions and to close them quickly. There's currently 66 questions in that tag, which makes it more than merely a insignificant tag.

The same goes for the other tags @hippietrail mentioned in the question. Those all have quite a number of questions and make it quite easy to find them.

  • 1
    I didn't know a tag could be renamed. If so, yes, rename it to 'standard-visitor-visa'. The downside of not making a synonym is to negate the hammers that allow the rapid closure of duplicates. The upside of renaming is that the tag has technical authenticity, and the 'uk-visit-visas' tag would be gone. Upside/downside to consider. If the tag cannot be renamed, then your proposal is well-intended but misses the mark.
    – Gayot Fow
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 6:54
  • 1
    Oh, I now see what you mean with the 'faster closing', this is because you and presumably others have enough reputation in those tags, to instant-close them. I didn't previously understand that from your answer. That makes sense, but IMO should not be a reason to reduce the number of tags. Renaming is possible, but afaik only by moderators. See for instance this recent meta post about renaming tags.
    – drat
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 7:33
  • If it can be renamed to 'standard-visitor-visa' that's a great solution. Gives uniformity and technically authentic. We can go ahead and accrue rep on the new tag. It may result in answering duplicates, but that's an unavoidable downside. Upside/downside previously mentioned still apply.
    – Gayot Fow
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 8:13
  • Note: the schema uses plural so 'standard-visitor-visas' would be in line and correct.
    – Gayot Fow
    Commented Feb 15, 2016 at 8:16

At present we have tag and, though only established in February this year, it has already been applied to 110 Open questions. (It may be that many other questions should now also be retagged to include .) (Separately, there is a request to pluralise it.)

Like tag it is country specific so, IMO (and in accordance with advice given by @Ankur Banerjee ♦ My general advice is instead of stuffing as many tags are you can, just use the most specific tags for the question., should not normally be used in conjunction with tag .

We do still only have two Gold tag-badge holders but probably do have the resources to close duplicates quickly even with fewer holders of Gold tag-badges for tag . At one time this consideration seemed more relevant (see Specific guidance for tagging.)

In addition to citizenship tags, closely or loosely connected with visas we also have in use at present at least:

With an overall limit of five tags per question and one usually required for citizenship (or perhaps three for dual nationals), four tags at most is restrictive to cover the key aspects of some questions. For example several of (there is a request to change the spelling of this) may be relevant to a single post, and or often go together, etc.

So I suggest:

ignore 1. (since is no longer in use for any Open question)
2. rename what does now exist (ie tag to , and
3. also do something else, such as:

comply with SE policy regarding tag hierarchy, and
review all the above tags as a collection.

You must log in to answer this question.

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