@MartinSleziak I vaguely feel that the faq could need some updating. But did not yet look into it in detail. Would you have an opinion on this?
Also, interesting question on the top-level tags on MO. I am curious what will come of it.
Presumably you know this anyway and only seek confirmation but: usually graph-theory under co.combinatorics, set-theory under lo.logic, real-analysis mostly ca.analysis-and-odes (but might also be fa or ap sometimes).
linear-algebra is more tricky. "By the book" I think it would be ra.rings-and-algebras but depending on context other things might be more natural such a ac.commutative-algebra. (Incidentally, at some point it had been proposed to delete this tag.)
On the other question, I guess I just do not see the point in not tagging co in addition to graph-theory.
I mean in general, if somebody really uses all fives tags, alright. But in general, I mean just what is gained form not tagging it?
Especially for those tags where there is a relatively natural top-level tag.
About MO top-level tag: I'll simply go with whatever the MO community says they consider correct tagging. I do not have any problem with treating (linear-algebra) or (graph-theory) as a top-level tag.
We talked about this a bit in the MO editors' lounge: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/10243/2016/5/22 (In fact, that real-analysis is probably used in that way did not occur to me until you mentioned it.)
But I have some doubts whether the question gets an answer at all. My impression is that there is not much participation in tag-related discussions on meta.MO. And this was also confirmed by François G. Dorais:
> These days, however, only a handful of users are interested in tagging issues, probably since the system works well enough for everyone.
In fact, I explicitly asked moderators in chat whether the question is ok - I said that I am certainly willing to delete it if it should be for some reasona problematic: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/10243/2017/10/21
@quid Do you mean update in the sense that some other questions should be chosen as faq or that some of the posts tagged as FAQ are a bit outdated and need some editing?
Perhaps both, but I guess mainly the latter.
IIRC this is one of those tags that can only be added/removed by moderators.
I am definitely not going through all FAQ posts at the same time - that would be quite a lot of reading.
But if I stumble upon something which needs updating, I can edit. (Or ask you for advice if I am not sure.)
After all, I use comment templates quite a lot, several of them contain link to some faq-item.
@BAYMAX If you are just looking for the how, that would be a suitable question IMHO. Do not ask for specific service providers or the list for a specific research area though.
I donot know,also asking for such a comfort may be wrong to me asking as a question, have to deal with many formalities before posting a question,it would be great if we could make a question on that,but i find no help,its ok any way.
@MartinSleziak yes both. I think the former could also be relevant. There are many "proposed faq."
@MartinSleziak the question then though would be does one keep the formatting of the arXiv tags, are the other top-level also marked in some way, or what else? At this point it could be probably best to simply drop the notion, and to recommend to use at least some popular tag.
Sorry I had forgotten that earlier conversation. Fortunately it appears I at least gave somewhat consistent advice.
Yes, but that that ping should not work... and it did not I think. Anyway I did not know about that, thanks for pointing it out. But he had left me a comment on meta, which is what I meant to follow up on.
