We've got a few tags which seem to me to be vague and poorly defined. They're natural phrases to use when describing a question in our field, but I don't think they're useful for tagging, categorization, and search purposes. 

The offenders I'm looking at right now are:

* [technique](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/technique "show questions tagged 'technique'") - I've [tried previously to clean this up](https://writers.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/230/technique-tag), but even after that I think it's just too generic a phrase to be a useful tag. In general, questions that *would* be appropriate for a [technique] tag would have other, more concrete tags to associate with.
* [writing-style](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/writing-style "show questions tagged 'writing-style'") and [style](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/style "show questions tagged 'style'") have similar problems. I'm a bit more wary here, though, because I'm not sure other tags cover all the territory "writing style" does. So I'm wondering if these should be blacklisted, or just policed really really well.
* [advice](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/advice "show questions tagged 'advice'") - I don't think this tag conveys any information. All our answers are advice. What's this tag for? (also cf. [Is a tips tag worthwhile?](https://writers.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8/is-a-tips-tag-worthwhile), since [tips] has been synonymed to [advice].)

What say ye?