How to tell if someone is a tactical or a positional player?

There are various types of chess styles. I am roughly a 1400 range player, although right now I am 1200s, as I have issues IRL and not been able to concentrate in games. Hit a peak of 1600 and then due to IRL issues plummeted to 1200s.

Dont think 1200 or 1400  players have any particular style, but if one had to know, how would you know if someone is a positional or tactical player.

If your rating has fallen by 350 points in the last week and you still want to know if you are tactical or positional, then you are a positional player.

You are undoubtedly the type that plays moves like this for long term position.

you jusy say if someone play good or not

ask the player

Amazingly, you have managed to miss your own point. Since beginners do not have a style, you can not know what it is even if you "had to".  There is no style to know. And of course, there is no reason that one would "have to" know.

"Building a repertoire ... we will take the idealized situation of someone starting from square one ... The first step is to think about your personal style. Do you prefer open, tactical positions or closed, strategic positions? Does an attack on your king make you nervous, or are you happy so long as you have a counter-attack? Do you prefer main lines, or something slightly offbeat? Next, look at the various openings available, and see which ones fit in with your personal style. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)

I find the original poster to be asking a serious question here and I suspect that the answer has less to do with chess rating than most would like to admit. 

What makes a chess player "tactical" versus "positional"? The difference is in preference of play style if the resulting options are "[roughly] equal." Typically, a positional player prefers to manuever their forces in closed setups and play in a slower/more controlled fashion; the tactical player tends to enjoy open tactical messes and sometimes King hunts. Everyone has a chess personality and thus a play-style; these can be placed into two broad categories (tactical versus positional), but there are many other sub-sets to these categories (play-styles). Of course, a GM is exceptional at both and will gladly play either tactically or positionally based on the board position (and everyone should too, but this means that the options were not "equal")

It is important to note that while everyone has a play-style, they may not know it, and weaker rated chess players often do not know which they are. Lower rated players still have a play-style (not blundering), but it is tricky to discover what that style is if blunders constantly show up. 

If you are a beginner at chess, or an accomplished titled player: everyone has a play-style (although they may not yet know which they are); the play-style is what comes more natural for you to play. I like the chess personality quiz (play-style) on chess.com, but ideally you will discover this for yourself through many games - but this may be a good alternative to asses which you may be if you are unsure, or if you don't have the time, or if you are just curious to see what the results claim. 

(I'll post the link to this article and anyone can follow the article link to the quiz) 

https://www.chess.com/article/view/whats-your-chess-personality 

The only stye most have is called Blundering.  Since you used your own example of going from 1600 to 1200, that further proves my point.  I don't eve think "style" is the correct term.  It should be called "preference"  My preference has always been that preference the young speed chess players call "boring"

"...the tactical player tends to enjoy open tactical messes and sometimes King hunts."

You do understand that tactics flow from a superior position?  And how do you get a superior position?

By playing good sound strategy...aka...Positional chess.

Do you not think that "positional" players go after the king also?

What difference does it make what word is used? Is anyone generally recognized as the single authority on the usage of chess terms?

Do they perhaps prefer what those young speed chess players call "boring"?

Probably the easiest is determining a person's knowledge and laziness.

Low knowledge + low energy = bad player
Low knowledge + high energy = tactical
High knowledge + low energy = positional
High knowledge + high energy = good player (and these are players who actually have a style, because instead of being forced to play a certain way, they choose the option they'd rather play, or the one they believe gives more winning chances on the board).

hehe

It's a little unfair though, because low and high are relative.

A 1400 with an average amount of knowledge (compared to peers) and willingness to calculate may be a good 1400 player... but of course a bad 2200 player haha

To the 2200 player, the 1400 is just bad and has no style.

But to other 1400 players maybe a style really does exist.

be a "play 40 good moves in a row" player

You can do analysis of games to determine style. Same idea that determines elo.

Of course! This alludes to what I noted earlier (IF the options were "equal") A forced mate via King hunt for example should be pursued regardless of play preference. Furthermore, "You do understand that tactics flow from a superior position?" Yes, I know Bobby Fischer's words well. In fact, I am currently reading "My Memorable 60 Games".

In one word...Wrong.