Should we have a tag called history? In one of its usages, it is synonymous with historical-linguistics. In the other usage, it is about non-linguistic history – the history of a theory, social movement, convention, etc. This latter category is where What are the rationale of people speaking/teaching Esperanto? and What is the reasoning behind the selection of the IPA symbols? fall.
What do people think we should do about this?
In my opinion, history tag should not be used for historical linguistics because there is already historical-linguistics and because it's misleading (history refers to the study of past events in general), so it must be retagged.
As for the usage for non-linguistic history, I think just let users use it first, and later we decide whether it's useful or we should kill it.
I am not sure there is much value in having a tag to encompass both these things, as they are pretty conceptually disjoint. I would propose that we make a second tag, perhaps called historical-context for questions of the second type. After time passes (and we are sure that there are no other uses for a history tag), we should make history a synonym of either historical-linguistics or historical-context.
