« first day (1269 days earlier)      last day (3072 days later) » 

Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
6:43 AM
in C.R.U.D.E., 17 hours ago, by Martin Sleziak
BTW is statistics really correct tag for the above post? (I have added two other tags.)
in C.R.U.D.E., 12 hours ago, by Normal Human
@MartinSleziak No, it's not. Whenever the distribution of all involved quantities is known, and conclusions about probabilities are made, there is no statistics. Students typically tag [statistics] because their course is named so. Sometimes misleadingly named, just because Statistics is Useful In Real World), sometimes the course combines probability and statistics, and the question comes from the probability part.
That seems like a useful guidance for using statistics tag.
Maybe we should flip the coin to decide whether coin-flipping tag should stay. Similarly for dice.
In any case, I see that coin-flipping is down to 38 questions. (It was above 50 yesterday.) So I suppose the removal of this tag has started.
Probably Daniel Fischer is working on it. And maybe some other users.
@DanielFischer Maybe it would be useful to add something in the edit summary - short explanation that this tag is being removed.
It is not that much work. You only need to write it once - when you do the same next time and start typing, the software offers you similar edit summaries from the past. (At least that is how it works for me in Firefox.)
For example I do not type this each time: Please do not use titles consisting only of math expressions; these are discouraged for technical reasons -- see meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/8891/title-and-latex (Example here.)
I simply type the word technical and browser offers me the above text. (Since it is the only edit summary I wrote which contains the word technical.)
I am not saying that the tag-edit is necessary, but it might be useful.
If there is an explanation in edit summary or in a comment, other users looking on the edit would understand what's going on.
Since you said that the tag was added mostly by two users, it would probably be good if at least these two users were aware of the effort to remove the tag.
On the other hand, if one of them is know to be somewhat confrontational on meta, I understand that notifying them about this might lead to problems...
 
 
2 hours later…
StackExchange
StackExchange
8:53 AM
0
Q: Do we need (modern-analysis) tag?

mrfGoing through the suggested edits review queue, I stumbled over a tag-wiki edit to modern-analysis. Since I had never seen that tag before, I had a look, and it was just created with one single question tagged (not by the OP). Do we really need that tag? (Where and when is the differerence betwe...

discussion tag-management
 
 
2 hours later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
10:56 AM
I have seen you added edit summary: "The (coin-flipping) tag is deemed useless and removed from all questions." Thanks for doing that, Daniel Fischer.
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
11:22 AM
You wrote: for example "data analysis" belong to "analysis", but in my understanding doesn't belong to "modern analysis". Data analysis definitely does not belong under (analysis) tag. This is even specified in the tag-excerpt and the tag-wiki. — Martin Sleziak 22 mins ago
@MartinSleziak you right, I've misread it, then I probably ask a rename or synonym if you want. because just analysis confuses. either modern analysis or math-analysis would work better. — Michael Medvinsky 10 mins ago
A "tag to include all things together" would be math! (Actually, that's not possible, as it is a so-called intrinsic tag, but maths would be possible as a request to add that to the intrinsic tag list hasn't been acted on.) For the specific question you introduced this tag to, I may have opted for functional-analysis, besov-space, and possibly nikolskii-spaces (this would have meant introducing the last, which may may not be used enough to retain). I think we have enough — likely too many — very broad tags. — Arthur Fischer ♦ 9 mins ago
@ArthurFischer I think I convinced enough, see my comment to Martin. You can remove this tag I guess. — Michael Medvinsky 7 mins ago
This seems like a reasonable assessment: "I think we have enough — likely too many — very broad tags."
On the other hand, broad tag are sometimes useful.
It is easier to follow general-topology tag, if this is something you're interested in, rather than several smaller tags.
 
 
3 hours later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
2:10 PM
So there is still the question whether to create synonym modern-analysis $\to$ analysis while the former exists, or whether to simply remove it.
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
3:04 PM
A synonym has been suggested:
3
A: Do we need a (modern-analysis) tag?

Eric WofseyI don't think that modern-analysis serves much purpose that analysis doesn't already serve, and from the voting and discussion here it sounds like others (including the creator of the tag) agree. I have thus proposed modern-analysis as a synonym of analysis.

 
 
3 hours later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
5:39 PM
I suggested modern-analysis as a synonym of analysis, but after some discussion (now deleted) found that this was controversial because analysis is largely deprecated. I encourage others to downvote the synonym suggestion unless there emerges a clearer consensus for it. — Eric Wofsey 1 hour ago
 

« first day (1269 days earlier)      last day (3072 days later) »