Our Help Centre contains the article What are tags, and how should I use them?. It defines tags as:
A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.
My view (with the usual caveat - please ignore any mod diamond you might see by my name), for what it's worth is that tags only add value to the site when used in this very limited way, or when they allow us to distinguish questions about a subject from those questions that simply mention that subject.
To (mis)quote Dr. Ian Malcolm: just because you can tag a question doesn't mean that you should.
Let me illustrate my point using the tags that were created (well before I joined the site) for the three main Allied leaders during the Second World War, fdr, stalin, and churchill.
Given that our two most popular tags (by a large margin) are united-states and world-war-two, it does seem likely that we will get quite a lot of questions about American Presidents, and that the President who led the United States through the build up to the Second World War, and through most of the war itself, might be expected to get more than most.
I'm guessing that was the reasoning behind the creation of the tag fdr.
A search for
fdr is:question gives 24 results, while searching for
roosevelt is:question gives 58. Of course, the United States has had two presidents name 'Roosevelt', so in this case, the tag fdr will - if used correctly - have the additional benefit of helping to distinguish questions about FDR from questions about Teddy Roosevelt.
In fact, right now, only 4 questions are tagged fdr.
Looking at the lists produced by the searches above, there should almost certainly be more. However, what is also clear from those search results is that many of the questions that mention FDR are not actually about FDR (for example What was the economic impact of WW1 on USA's economy?), and so should absolutely not be tagged fdr.
In the case of stalin, the situation is slightly simpler. It is unlikely that we will be getting too many questions about 'Fred Stalin from Cleethorpes', so the only purpose of the tag here is to distinguish between questions about Stalin and questions that just mention Stalin.
We currently have 50 questions that are tagged stalin, while a search for `stalin is:question' gives 151 results. Clearly this tag is needed. But it only has value if it is used consistently and correctly. Looking at the lists, it seems this has not always been done.
For example (in my opinion), the question Why did the rest of the Eastern Bloc not invade Yugoslavia? has been tagged stalin when it should not have been, while Were there any attempts to assassinate Joseph Stalin? has not been tagged stalin and it really should have been.
Finally we come to churchill.
I couldn't find a meta post about the creation of this tag, and it was created before I joined, but my first question on seeing that tag would be "Is that Winston, Jack, or Sarah?" (in much the same way as, if we ever get enough questions to justify the creation of a tag for Oliver Cromwell (the Lord Protector of England), we name it in such a way as to avoid the possibility of confusion with Thomas Cromwell, or even Richard Cromwell).
I think this illustrates the value in gaining input from the community before creating new tags.
We have 17 questions currently tagged churchill, while a search for
churchill is:question gives 72 results. Once again, the tag does not appear to have been used consistently or correctly in all cases. The question Which peace offer did Hitler give to Great Britain in 1940? has been tagged churchill, and probably should not be. On the other hand, the question Is it true that Winston Churchill said 'I bet my head on Crete' (or a similar statement)? is not tagged churchill, and it probably should be.
Now, I am not proposing a single massive re-tagging operation across all the questions and tags on the site. That would be hugely disruptive. But if people really want to improve tagging on the site, just correcting a few of these each day, to ensure that tags are only used where the question is about the topic of the tag, it could eventually give us a system of tags that is genuinely useful.
Of course, this highlights a good reason for what you have called "minimalism in tagging". Fewer tags require less maintenance, and less maintenance means less disruption to the site. The burden of that maintenance falls on the community as a whole, and the impact of that maintenance affects us all.
To give just one further example.
In another meta question you proposed the creation of the tag east-india-company for the 'Honourable East India Company' (HEIC). A search for 'east india company is:question' currently gives 31 results, and a brief check of the list shows that many of those questions mention the company, but are not about the company (for example Why has Nepal never been conquered or colonized?).
Similarly, some of those questions are about the VoC (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie, or '* Dutch East India Company*'), although probably not yet enough to justify creating their own tag (searching for
voc is:question returned 3 questions, while searching `dutch east india company is:question' returned 5 questions. Interestingly, only 2 of the questions from the first search appear in the second. Those 2 are actually questions about the VoC, while the 3rd isn't).
It is worth noting that the HEIC also appears in answers to questions which don't themselves mention it. An example here would be: What percentage of the British Empire's economy was profits from the opium trade?. (Clearly, this question isn't about the HEIC, and so shouldn't be tagged, if and when we do agree that the tag should be created.)
The point here is that it is possible that an answer to a question will occasionally show that the question actually was about the tagged topic, even if the OP of the question didn't realise it, and the question didn't mention it. In that case, it is probably appropriate to re-tag the question (ideally, perhaps, when posting the answer). I did scroll through the list of answers and didn't see any in this case, but it is always worth checking.
So, given all the above, in my opinion, it probably is worth creating a tag for the HEIC. The value of the tag would be disambiguation between questions about the HEIC and questions that simply mention the HEIC. However, we should be careful when choosing its name, and should also probably create relevant synonyms and an appropriate description for the tag at the same time.
But, to be absolutely clear, that tag only has real value if it used solely for questions about the HEIC, and not just for any question that happens to mention the company.