It is like having separate tags for ansible-syntax, ansible-modules, and ansible-conditionals, much too granular. It does not make sense to have a separate tag for questions that are playbook related.
I believe I suggested a while ago to mark
ansible-playbook as a synonym of
ansible but the suggestion didn't receive enough votes.
While I believe that, strictly technical speaking,
ansible-galaxy are distinct tools, it does not seem practical to use tags to distinguish between those any further. No relevant amount people on SF is only watching one of those subtags. For example almost no question tagged with
ansible-playbook doesn't also have the
ansible tag. It appears to me that the tags are practically synonyms.
From my perspective the root cause of this situation is that it is too easy to create a new tag and way too hard to get rid of useless tags. Way too hard in terms of
tags having the potential of being a useful tool for a community the size of SF.
It is not fruitful to ask if there is a technical distinction. It is useful to check if people can and do distinguish accurately. And in this case it is, looking at the data, pretty obvious that people don't do so.
My (extremely) understanding of the Ansible ecosystem is that "Ansible" by itself most properly refers to the entire suite of Ansible-related tools, with most people understanding that saying "ansible" by itself in an appropriate context refers to the playbook tool, for backwards-compatibility purposes. If that's a correct understanding, would it make more sense instead to blacklist ansible and require people to use the appropriate more-specific tag in all cases?
I'm a fan of tag cleanups, so whichever way works best I'm all in favour. Just a matter of determining which way makes the most sense.