A while ago I noticed that we have a tag .

This seems like a suboptimal situation. Lowgraphics isn't a even a word. If we really need a tag for that, shouldn't it be ? And since we have this canonical post:

How to fix "The system is running in low-graphics mode" error?

(which doesn't have this tag, or even the tag) do we really need a tag? Seems like the question is meant to cover all questions about "low graphics mode", so having a whole tag for one error seems overkill to me. It's like having a tag . I think we should burn it.


Edit:
In response to Kaz Wolfe's answer stating that the tag has value for questions that are actually about low graphics mode itself rather than being dupes of the canonical post, I guess only this question somewhat fits that description. If the tag were called maybe it would be easier for people to use it for that purpose, if it is actually needed. I have now retagged numerous posts that previously had this tag and are about graphics issues but not low graphics mode (the tag is being used inconsistently).

I have spent a month cleaning up this tag, and it now only has 27 posts, nearly all of which are closed, and several of which I've delete-voted (the canonical post has over 200 duplicates). Some of the posts could still be improved somewhat by editing, but I have refrained from editing them since I'm anticipating renaming the tag or untagging and I wanted to avoid bumping them twice.


What's the best thing to do about this tag?

  • Leave it and fix the poorly-worded usage guidance?
  • Rename it (I think this can only be done by editing the posts)?
  • Burninate it (can now be done by editing the posts over a few days)?

The tag does have some legitimate use:

  • Questions explicitly about Low Graphics mode (so, not troubleshooting)
  • Questions about low-graphics mode in certain DEs (like Unity)
  • Working with Ubuntu on devices with weak/low graphical capability
  • Similar things, you get the idea.

In the current use case, a vast majority of questions carrying that tag should not even exist. Instead, they should be closed as a dupe of the canonical question you have in your question.

That said, the tag should be renamed to something cleaner, like . The real question would be whether questions that warrant that tag will even exist upon going through and dealing with everything that already has the current tag. In other words, post-cleanup of the tag as it currently is might result in the organic deletion of the tag without any more effort from mods or high-rep users.

  • 1
    Hmm I will carry on cleaning and check back later then – Zanna Apr 30 '17 at 4:16
  • There weren't any such questions in the tag, so I burned it – Zanna Jul 24 at 22:11

I think it is better to have a correct tag instead. Low-Graphics is Graphics and maybe one that not everyone wants to actually use IMHO. So it being just a type of Graphics makes it fall into the former, the term more correct is one that reflects the purpose of "Low-Graphics-mode" which is the name Fallback

In the case of the tag it would be an alternative DE and not much a Low-Graphics mode and this is the one targeted to the Low-end Hardware.

This is the difference I see:

  • Low-end HW -> Alternative DE
  • Error -> Fallback

You must log in to answer this question.

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