[Canon criticism] is a way of interpreting the Bible that focuses on the text of the biblical canon itself as a finished product.... Whereas other types of biblical criticism focus on the origins, structure and history of the text, canonical criticism looks at the meaning the text in its final form has for the community which uses it.
The canon-criticism tag is extremely important and should be preserved. Important questions under this tag would include questions pertinent to the Canonical Interpretation of Scripture, such as how the arrangement of books in the Old Testament / Tanakh might impact the interpretation of the "excellent wife" of Proverbs 31 and/or Ruth. If we were to nix that tag we would lose an entire field of Biblical Studies... an entire hermeneutic. (Or at least, the tag for it.)
How would the arrangement of books have anything to do with interpreting a passage in a given text? Especially when many of those books hadn't even been written when those texts were and different traditions order the books differently? That seems like an anachronistic hermeneutic if I ever saw one - and a purely doctrinal/theological one.
While I think such an approach to the text would be perfectly acceptable over at C.SE or MY.SE, it would be off topic here since it involves defining a canon and is specific to a religious tradition.
Help me think through this. I'm still of the mindset that a purely religious/doctrinal hermeneutic (outside of those that embrace pluralism) is a better fit for a different SE site. If so, this tag should probably be burninated. If not, help me screw my thinking cap on straight ;)
If it is on topic (and I'm willing to concede that it may be depending on the direction of other meta questions), does it need its own tag as it is essentially a hermeneutic approach/method? We don't have tags for every single hermeneutic, so why this one?