This got a bit much in comments, so I'll try to post my analysis on this here.
Why this question is legitimately tagged islamic-hispania:
- All the sentences ending with a
? are talking about the actions and behaviors of Islamic-controlled areas of Al-Andulus, which that tag was designed to cover.
- That tag also covers Almoravid-controlled parts of the peninsula, which was mentioned in the 2nd paragraph to provide the required contrast for a relative concept (intolerance).
Why this question is legitimately tagged spain:
- Contrast is also made with the Aragon-Castilian Alhambra Decree.
- Spain is mentioned 3 times in the first paragraph.
These are arguably weaker reasons, but tags do get thrown onto questions for weaker reasons sometimes.
Things that would not be good reasons to tag the question with spain:
- Some of the specific places mentioned (eg: Toledo) eventually became Spanish territory.
- Some of the of the territory of Al Andulus eventually became Spanish territory.
If those two were the only reasons, then I'd agree that the spain tag perhaps should be removed too. This goes for any other country tags that might today cover some territory that used to be part of Al Andulus, but wasn't otherwise mentioned in the question, such as portugal and morocco.
An astute person might notice there's an inherent principle in here I'm glossing over, which is that I don't think spain should be used geographically. Its probably OK to talk about an area that was at the time ruled by a state that later became Spain (like Aragon or Castile), because there were a few of those and making tags for them all probably wouldn't be feasible.
If this means that we ought to have something like iberan-peninsula to cover the need for a geographic term, well I don't think I'd argue against it. I would ask that nobody go on a retagging-spree without discussing it in meta first.