Requested feature overview description.
Codify it in the rules that users shouldn't nuke artist tags.

Why would it be useful?
Japanese and other non-English nicks get manually moved all the time. Which makes it nearly impossible to find out which artist tag is used for them here, when all you know is the original nick. ...and the nick that's used here is usually mistranslated or mistransliterated.

I'm bloody tired of tracking those down. Tag history searches take ages, and often time out.

Honestly, I think it should be a rule that you need to communicate, on a specific thread, about tag nuking if you have done it or want to do it.

+1.

*i'm getting real tired of using commas. Starting to slip up in their appropriate usage...*

Doesn't "Removing a valid tag, either as part of a dispute/argument, or to place one that is not correct" already cover that base?

NotMeNotYou said:
Doesn't "Removing a valid tag, either as part of a dispute/argument, or to place one that is not correct" already cover that base?

Evidently not, because it keeps happening. And so far I've never seen anyone get slapped for it.

Genjar said:
Evidently not, because it keeps happening. And so far I've never seen anyone get slapped for it.

Have you reported them? I don't think I ever saw a ticket on that before.

NotMeNotYou said:
Have you reported them? I don't think I ever saw a ticket on that before.

Those tend get discovered weeks or months later, and by then it's late to report them.

Most who do it seem to consider it clean up, not vandalism. And yeah, there's no sense in having two tags for the same artist. But the tags should be aliased instead of manually combined. So that we can find the artist by searching for their actual nick, instead of having to resort to using harry.lu or tag history to find whichever tag is used here..

If things don't get reported, it doesn't matter what rule is being broken-- if I don't see it, I can't act on it. I can't go and slap for things that happened a month ago but this is the same for every action on the site.

I'm not sure what this rule would do that the current rules don't.

Fair enough.
If it were in the rules, it'd at least be easy to just point at the rule when someone asks why they shouldn't keep doing that. But other than that, I doubt that it'd have much effect.

I don't see a reason we couldn't use this as an example in the rule, though, similar to what we do with other rules.

Genjar said:
I'm bloody tired of tracking those down. Tag history searches take ages, and often time out.

Tag history also does not show when a tag got removed: forum #216383

Ratte said:
I don't see a reason we couldn't use this as an example in the rule, though, similar to what we do with other rules.

+1 for example.