« first day (2463 days earlier)      last day (1740 days later) » 

03:26
Actually this is a quotation of Wikipedia (with reference to WIkipedia), so we can just copy it. Actually this tag doesn't seem to be an issue, since it has a precise focussed meaning. In general, a tag-info is particularly important if the scope of the tag is not obvious (e.g., is more than just what is written, or is less, in particular when there are several meanings). In practice, the more a tag is misused, the more a tag-info is needed. — YCor 6 hours ago
03:39
I will just mention that several tag-wikis on MathOverflow were copy-pasted from Wikipedia (or other resource) without any attribution. See: Recent suggested tag wiki edits and Should tag-wiki include a source where it is taken from?
At least some of those tag-wikis were already edited. (I have edited some of them to include WP link - as a form attribution. I think other users have edited several of them, too.) I am not sure whether some of the problematic tag-wikis still remain.
In the posts linked above, you can find a query showing tag-infos created/edited by this particular user: data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/885912/… data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/886143/…
Specifically in connection with the problem mentioned above, I remember some edits by S. Carnahan and jeq.
Aug 19 '18 at 23:09, by Martin Sleziak
It seems that some users have taken a different approach how to deal with problematic tag-wikis - complete removal. For example, the edit by S. Carnahan on the zeta-functions tag-wiki and the edits by jeq on the orthogonal-matrices tag-excerpt and tag-wiki.
 
2 hours later…
05:55
I have removed the deprecated tag here: Reference sought for Conway's observation on stable matchings. I wasn't really sure whether should be added or not. mathoverflow.net/posts/69832/revisions
5
Q: Reference sought for Conway's observation on stable matchings

user16317Looking for a reference on the observation that the set of stable matchings form a distributive lattice. This is attributed to Conway by Knuth in "Marriages Stables" but I would like an explicit reference if possible, likely a text book. An undergrad student needs it for his bibliography in a ter...

 
2 hours later…
07:43
I guess might be suitable here - although I am not sure it is worth to bump the question just in order to add the tag: Is $[0,1]$ a disjoint union of $\aleph_1$ compact subsets with empty interior?
9
Q: Is $[0,1]$ a disjoint union of $\aleph_1$ compact subsets with empty interior?

Mizar Is $[0,1]$ a disjoint union of $\aleph_1$ compact subsets with empty interior? The answer is obviously yes assuming the continuum hypothesis. Also, by Baire's lemma, the answer is negative if one replaces $\aleph_1$ with $\aleph_0$. Does anybody know if this question has a definite answer o...

@MartinSleziak Yes the tag sounds natural there.
Would fit here: Generalized height of elements in abelian groups. (Maybe also some other tags related to group theory.) At the same time, this instance of could be cleaned-up.
2
Q: Generalized height of elements in abelian groups

Ilan BarneaIn the book Infinite abelian groups Vol. I by L. Fuchs, on page 154, the notion of the generalized $p$-height of an element in an abelian group is defined, as follows: Let $A$ be an abelian group and let $p$ be a prime number. First we define for every ordinal $\sigma$ a subgroup $p^\sigma A$ o...

08:50
I have edited added to the question mentioned above. I was not sure whether to leave or not - but I am more inclined to leave it. (The reason is - to some extent - that I want to respect the tags chosen by the OP, mainly in the cases where the decision whether to remove tag is not clear-cut.)
@MartinSleziak I agree, I'd say is the "naive" tag for such a question, but it's not completely irrelevant and there was no strong reason to remove it (such as the 5-tag limit)
 
3 hours later…
11:57
Perhaps could be added here: Compact spaces whose compactness does not come from a product of compact spaces. We discussed a few days ago - it seems better not to use it in the meaning of product spaces.
2
Q: Compact spaces whose compactness does not come from a product of compact spaces

Cameron ZwarichFor the (Hausdorff) compact spaces I can think of, compactness is established either using a product of compact spaces (including the Heine-Borel Theorem, the Banach-Alaoglu Theorem, Stone-Čech compactification, etc.) or by inheriting compactness from another space (e.g. the Hausdorff metric on c...

 
2 hours later…
14:22
@MartinSleziak It could be added. I also think that is not accurate. It seems to have a "pedagogical" aspect as the question is a bit imprecise. I'm not sure what the right tag for this type of question ("is there an example of X satisfying P such that the proof does not use this kind of phenomenon")... is not great since it's not an alternative proof...

« first day (2463 days earlier)      last day (1740 days later) »