user12909: A recent member VassiaAlk has posted numerous questions related to statistically analysis and software under these tags. Presently, their questions are on par with the tags but their questions aren't being well received. Out of the 13 questions asked, 5 are on hold.
I believe these tags are misleading. These tags suggest that questions on statistically analysis of data sets related to Biology are on topic for the site but the questions are being put on hold as off topic and the user is being advised to check out SO or cross validated.
Should these tags be removed to avoid confusion? If not, what is a question that would be on topic relating to data, biostatistics, and informatics? If there are questions that can utilize all these tags and be on topic, the tag wikis need to clear state this, and at present, data and biostatistics are empty. However, bioinformatics says:

Bioinformatics is a broad field that interfaces a variety of life science disciplines (biology, genetics, biochemistry, etc.) with a variety of quantitative sciences (mathematics, statistics, computer science, etc.). Bioinformatic techniques typically involve developing and applying software and algorithms to computationally intensive biological questions, such as those common in structural biology, genomics, sequence analysis, and systems biology.
Some scientists draw a distinction between the terms bioinformatics and computational biology. While these areas are indeed broad and diverse, the distinctions in terms is not consistent or well-defined.

I hope we can all see that these tags are very misleading since VassiaAlk questions cover the scope of stats, math, software, computational bio, etc, but they are being put on hold at a high rate.

user3624: I think some of the questions should have been kept open (at least in an edited form), but many not. If the problem and the specific application deals closely with biology, so that answers will depend on biological knowledge and assumptions of biological processes I think they are on-topic for the site. However, many of @VassiaAlk's questions do not contain any biology, and deals only with statistics and software (that are common with many other fields). In those cases, I think they are off-topic for BioSE. 
To give some examples, this question on data normalization has nothing to do with biology and should be posted at StackOverflow (also this, but for CrossValidatedSE), but would probably be closed there as well for being unclear/opinion-based. On the other hand, this question on phylogeny construction and sequence alignment should be on-topic (I think). However, the last Q still has some problems, since asking for "the best" is always problematic, especially without more background information.
As for tags, I think we should use both biostatistics and bioinformatics, but data is vague and pretty useless.

12909: <p>A recent member <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/users/12935/vassiaalk">VassiaAlk</a> has posted numerous questions related to statistically analysis and software under these tags. Presently, their questions are on par with the tags but their questions aren't being well received. Out of the 13 questions asked, 5 are on hold.</p>
<p>I believe these tags are misleading. These tags suggest that questions on statistically analysis of data sets related to Biology are on topic for the site but the questions are being put on hold as off topic and the user is being advised to check out SO or cross validated.</p>
<p>Should these tags be removed to avoid confusion? If not, what is a question that would be on topic relating to data, biostatistics, and informatics? If there are questions that can utilize all these tags and be on topic, the tag wikis need to clear state this, and at present, data and biostatistics are empty. However, bioinformatics says:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bioinformatics is a broad field that interfaces a variety of life science disciplines (biology, genetics, biochemistry, etc.) with a variety of quantitative sciences (mathematics, statistics, computer science, etc.). Bioinformatic techniques typically involve developing and applying software and algorithms to computationally intensive biological questions, such as those common in structural biology, genomics, sequence analysis, and systems biology.</p>
<p>Some scientists draw a distinction between the terms <em>bioinformatics</em> and <em>computational biology</em>. While these areas are indeed broad and diverse, the distinctions in terms is not consistent or well-defined.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I hope we can all see that these tags are very misleading since VassiaAlk questions cover the scope of stats, math, software, computational bio, etc, but they are being put on hold at a high rate.</p>
 3624: <p>I think some of the questions should have been kept open (at least in an edited form), but many not. If the problem and the specific application deals closely with biology, so that answers will depend on biological knowledge and assumptions of biological processes I think they are on-topic for the site. However, many of @VassiaAlk's questions do not contain any biology, and deals only with statistics and software (that are common with many other fields). In those cases, I think they are off-topic for BioSE. </p>

<p>To give some examples, <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/27728/how-to-run-quantile-normalization-on-data-matrix-in-r">this</a> question on data normalization has nothing to do with biology and should be posted at StackOverflow (also <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/27767/is-it-necessary-to-log-transform-and-normalize-microarray-data-for-clustering-pr">this</a>, but for CrossValidatedSE), but would probably be closed there as well for being unclear/opinion-based. On the other hand, <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/27772/what-free-software-is-the-best-for-the-alignment-and-phylogenetic-tree-construct">this</a> question on phylogeny construction and sequence alignment should be on-topic (I think). However, the last Q still has some problems, since asking for "<em>the best</em>" is always problematic, especially without more background information.</p>

<p>As for tags, I think we should use both <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/biostatistics" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;biostatistics&#39;" rel="tag">biostatistics</a> and <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/bioinformatics" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;bioinformatics&#39;" rel="tag">bioinformatics</a>, but <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/data" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;data&#39;" rel="tag">data</a> is vague and pretty useless.</p>
