Considering that the site is about Language Learning, studies is inferred.

Should we use the tag at all?

6 Answers 6


, to me, means "studies, published in a peer reviewed journal". Not "I'm doing my language studies before bed."

Perhaps a less ambiguous tag can be used for this. I like @Gille's suggestion of . It doesn't have the ambiguity shortcomings of (is the question asking about results of past research, or how to conduct research, etc)?

  • 1
    This is a good point. I think there should definitely be a better name for it.
    – Alex A.
    Apr 5, 2016 at 20:06
  • In an ideal world, wouldn't every answer cite studies? Perhaps some topics simply haven't been studied, but I'd think that any answer would benefit from one. So why call this out in a tag? Apr 5, 2016 at 20:07
  • @Nathaniel: I don't think it's fair to assume that all types of questions call for studies. "What is SRS?" doesn't need a study. "How do I test for the TOEFL?" doesn't need studies. Many questions, however, will need studies... and perhaps it an expectation can be built into the site, which would make such a tag meaningless.
    – Flimzy
    Apr 5, 2016 at 20:10
  • Wouldn't research fit better the definition you propose? Apr 5, 2016 at 20:13
  • @bilbo_pingouin: to me that, sounds like it's about the act of doing research. "How would I conduct an experiment to test X hypothesis?" seems like a candidate for [research] to me.
    – Flimzy
    Apr 5, 2016 at 20:15
  • 3
    should we go the long way and get a published-studies? Apr 5, 2016 at 20:17
  • @bilbo_pingouin: Maybe, but might I suggest first a wiki tag entry, and see what happens? There are only 4 open questions with that tag presently, and they all fit my definition of the term. Can we leave things as they are unless/until a problem is truly shown to exist?
    – Flimzy
    Apr 5, 2016 at 20:18
  • @Flimzy well I do find it ambiguous. But we might give it a bit of time... Apr 5, 2016 at 20:20
  • @Flimzy it'll only continue to get worse, best to fix it while the questions are in the single digits
    – Quill
    Apr 6, 2016 at 1:25
  • @Quill: "Continue to get worse" implies an existing problem. What evidence do you have that the tag is being misused now?
    – Flimzy
    Apr 6, 2016 at 6:13
  • The tag description is incorrect, and this meta question and this chat message all are examples of misinterpreting/miscommunication of the tag's intention
    – Quill
    Apr 6, 2016 at 6:36
  • @Quill: I've submitted an edit to the description. It's awaiting approval.
    – Flimzy
    Apr 6, 2016 at 6:36
  • 3
    Many Stack Exchange sites use reference-request for this, I think it's the de facto standard and it would be somewhat confusing for people who visit multiple sites to have a different tag name here. Apr 6, 2016 at 21:07
  • @Gilles: I like that suggestion.
    – Flimzy
    Apr 7, 2016 at 5:38
  • @Gilles: Perhaps you should provide that as an answer, so it can be unambiguously voted upon.
    – Flimzy
    Apr 7, 2016 at 8:40

has no purpose delete it


  • It is inferred from our question title
  • It is like on Math.SE and will probably inevitably be deleted.
  • refers to almost the entire scope of the site

No, I don't think it's necessary. As you said, I think studying is implied given the context of the site.


I say we use the that I've created. It's clear and unambiguous unlike which could be misinterpreted in a number of ways.

And I say this as the second highest asker of the tag .

  • I also like the tag "published-studies"
    – Quill
    Apr 6, 2016 at 21:55
  • [scientific-research] is ambiguous, but in a different way. "How can I conduct an experiment to test X hypothesis?" would be appropriate for a [scientific-research] tag. I like @Gille's suggestion to use [reference-request].
    – Flimzy
    Apr 7, 2016 at 5:40

I don't like the word "studies." It is basically implied by the site, that we are "studying" languages.

A better usage might be something like "field," or "discipline." That would imply some "subset" of language learning.


Peer-reviewed-evidence might be a more precise tag for the same purpose.

  • It is. But do we want only peer-reviewed one? And the other possible problem being that people are unlikely to find it as suggested tag. Apr 6, 2016 at 6:20
  • There are some answers where only peer-reviewed evidence is requested. It could be useful to have a special tag for those cases.
    – Christian
    Apr 6, 2016 at 8:12

You must log in to answer this question.

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