There is one question about first aid kits for long distance running. The user added a request in the question for a tag.

P.s. please, create label long-distance-running. Running is a bit vague here, this is quite different thing -- more about endurance running and sometimes related to other activity such as trekking. But the common element to carry first-aid-kit is long-distance and unknown places so you need to be better prepared than locally.

Should the tag be broken up? What are the arguments for or against it?

EDIT: Dave's answer makes sense here. Retag things as necessary as they come up. No need to plan out everything right now.

| |
  • Is there actually a reason why tags aren't combined separately? Would it be that long-distance then in itself would no longer have a meaning? – Ivo Flipse Dec 29 '11 at 9:54
  • @hhh Please move your arguments to your answer. – Matt Chan Dec 30 '11 at 5:46
  • @MattChan: sorry I am confused. @IvoFlipse: can you clarify? @everyone: someone with better ideas for the current naming? Is long-distance enough? (I think it is vague, long-distance-running is better as more specific.) Long-distance-runing != marathon. I think we should see how things evolve (I have organized already some questions so you see how different things are under them.). P.s. we can change things later if we see the labels are misused. – user2598 Dec 30 '11 at 6:29
  • ...related running proposal here. If this site begins, then it will become more granual for sure. – user2598 Dec 30 '11 at 13:56
  • @hhh My point was that the arguments you were making in the comments should have been added to your answer below. – Matt Chan Dec 30 '11 at 15:01

Running is the most-used tag right now, and it sure is broad. I don't see any good reason not to subdivide it.

I'm in favor of adding sprinting and long-distance running tags. We could keep the general case.

| |
  • +1 yes not bad idea at all. Good ideas! Sprinting is totally different thing to long-distance: shoes tend to be different, training, muscle types, nutrition recs,.... For common issues, it is good to have more broad "running". I find this division a bit similar to touring and commuter in Bicycle.SE. The fact that we have legs and most of us can run does not mean that everyone mean the same thing with their "running", it makes communication/searching much easier if we can separate the issues. – user2598 Dec 29 '11 at 7:27

I think it is good idea here to create consintency between different SE sites, particularly here between Bicycle.SE and Fitness.SE.

running ---> long-distance (running)
-----------> fast (sprinting)
-----------> casual (jogging)
-----------> training (?)
-----------> other?

riding ----> long-distance (touring)
-----------> fast (?)
-----------> casual (commuting)
-----------> training(?)
-----------> other?

I would like to subdivide running because it is bloated now. Running is a bit like riding: running/sprinting/long-distance-running/marathon/XYZ ~ riding/training/touring/commuting/XYZ. Now I am not sure whether it is even possible to create some consistency here, perhaps, community blog could cover similarities between the sites to help people find things?

| |
  • 1
    I don't see particular utility in generalizing across SE sites. Doing so would either automate the process, thereby creating inaccuracies, or would require me to argue with Biking people to change something in Fitness. No me gusta. – Dave Liepmann Dec 30 '11 at 17:21
  • @DaveLiepmann: Jein! It is mostly a redirection thing, there is no need to talk with bicycle guys or future sport site guys (although architect may help). It is possible to create redirections from specific sites to other sites with redirecting stuff -- and I do not see much division here between stuff such as endurance over many sites (even some users are the same over such issues...). Now just important to connect the dots over such issues not to reinvent the dxmn wheel again-and-again. Until proper redirections, it is essential to keep different things separate with specific labeling. – user2598 Dec 31 '11 at 1:21
  • If you're proposing simply that we should poach ideas from other SE sites, then I agree wholeheartedly and would humbly point out forthwith that we--as individuals, a group and as a nation--are already doing so with utmost haste. If you are proposing something technical, something requiring administrative intervention, or some regulated process, then I call that idea a roustabout, unsuitable for this fine establishment. – Dave Liepmann Dec 31 '11 at 2:48
  • @DaveLiepmann: you are making this overly complicated. There is no pro skills required except tolerance for new ideas, no revolution or any extreme -- just some good manner skills required to tolerate other ideas. This question in Meta is in itself large distraction, just see how things evolve. I recommend to keep intrinsic things separate, we can change labeling later from long-distance to other when needed. Currently, I see no point to intervene with running community to jam everything under running. No spaghetti, please, with political rhetoric that builds on nothing. Have fuN! – user2598 Dec 31 '11 at 3:04

You must log in to answer this question.

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