Yes, all of the law tags should just be law. Fundamentally, this isn't a site about law, and drawing any distinction between the various possibilities of law isn't going to bring a person here or not. Fundamentally, this is a site about space, and unless the word "space" is required to make sense of the word (space-junk, for instance), then it should be ...
Rename columbia to shuttle-columbia, to allow space for a columbia-csm if needed.
Make ov-102 a synonym of shuttle-columbia.
Merge sts-107 into shuttle-columbia without synonymizing, just to get rid of the sts-107 tag. If we find that the tag keeps getting recreated, we can revisit making it a synonym.
It's hard to judge how many questions will make use of a particular tag in the future, but I have to say I tend to agree it might be slightly too specific, and it mightn't find many future uses. However, we do have other tags that further differentiate between various artificial satellite types, be it by their purpose / function, design / size, e.t.c. and ...
I'm thinking international-law should be for questions relating to laws that are not specifically for space, whereas space-law should be used for questions relating to laws that were specifically drafted for space.
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty would be international-law
because it is also for fully ground based weaponry, not just space
I strongly disapprove of that because Columbia had a long and storied history. It should not be only known because of the accident.
There was also an Apollo command module named Columbia.
I hate it when people refer to the failures by the names of the Orbiters.
If you're going to make "columbia" = "sts-107" then we need "columbia-...
I could see us getting more questions on the Columbia orbiter. I think a merge/synonym of sts-107 into columbia would be a good idea, not because they are exactly equal, but because we don't need a separate tag for the subset of questions about specifically mission STS-107.