I don't want to be unnecessarily pedantic, but there seems to be little consistency in the way we tag. I'm not even sure I understand how it all works. If you have "Fred Flintstone" in your title, do you need to put "Fred, Flintstone" in your tags? I've seen a lot of folks tagging with "you, have, to, see, this, to, believe, it," Which is cute and all, but doesn't that just all a lot of noise? Who would ever want to see all the videos with "to" in the tags? We do get a lot of dupes because of poor tagging.
Someone once imagined VS becoming the "wikipedia of web videos". If that's in fact an aspiration, shouldn't we clean up our tagging a little?
Is there a post where general guidelines to effective tagging are?
Someone once imagined VS becoming the "wikipedia of web videos". If that's in fact an aspiration, shouldn't we clean up our tagging a little?
Is there a post where general guidelines to effective tagging are?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy
[edit] Then there's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta_noise
I don't have a problem with a funny tag as long as it doesn't replace a useful one. A tag like "you, have, to, see, this, to, believe, it" should not be used as it's pretty much useless.
good,thing,im,not,jealous,but,i,hate,him,anyway
http://www.videosift.com/talk/Video-tag-cloud-a-quantitativequalitative-reseach
The noise is negligable all together, but I think in general one ought to try to add tags concerning..
1-credits (e.g. beerdude367, The Acid Radio)
2-when and where produced (e.g. 00s, 2007, madagascar)
3-important keywords that are not in the channel name (e.g. youtube, fire, explosion, romance)