@YuiToCheng I've seen that you removed the "dimension-theory" tag from a lot of questions. Remember that doing this bumps these questions to the home page; right now 9 out of the first 10 questions are questions about dimension that you just edited. You might want to slow down a bit.
This makes me think that we need to have a tag for dimension in the sense of linear algebra, if only because users will want to tag their questions "dimension". Would this fall under the suggested "dimension-theory-algebra" tag?
This also naturally brings the question whether to have separate tag for dimension in linear algebra/vector spaces. Some past discussion about this issue in this chatroom: https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2165/conversation/tag-for-dimension-of-vector-spaces
We do not have tag specifically for dimension in linear algebra. However, if we created tags for dimension, linear combinations, linear independence etc., we might end up with too many very specific tags.
Another option would be to consider that vector-spaces is sufficient, and add a suggestion in the tag-wiki and/or tag-excerpt to use that instead? Something like "For questions about the dimension of a vector space, use (vector-spaces) instead."
Does it make sense that span is a synonym of linear-algebra? Seems like a decent enough tag to me. And the latter is gigantic that some structuring could be good.
Well, short answer is that I do not know what to do with questions about dimension (in the sense of linear algebra).
Maybe it is a topic which should be discussed on meta at some point. (OTOH it's probably not too good to post many tag-related questions at the same time. Andrews's questions about splitting (dimension-theory) received almost no feedback so far - despite having several upvotes.)
@YuiToCheng I certainly agree with the comment that we should avoid bumping too many posts at the same time. (And you have been around long enough to see a few discussions on meta about this.) Still, I'd like to add that I appreciate your effort in correcting tags.
If this is helpful: When I have a larger retagging to do or several posts where that should edit because of the same issue, a thing which helps me to slow down is if (after bumping a post) I check whether there is some other stuff that can be improved/edited.
2
I should try to find some time to retag some of those posts where (dimension-theory) is used for dimension in linear algebra - after all, retagging such questions was suggested by me.
There are various places where various edits count/don't count (such as CW posts, tag-only, etc.) For example, you'll see different number in the list of editors and in your profile.
It's quite difficult to remember which edits count where (and for which badges).
I think some of those counts also exclude edits on your own posts.
Number of edits is a serious matter. I don't have much time to do that right now, but perhaps some SEDE queries for number of edits within some timeframe with various criteria (similar to criteria shown in those places) might be useful. (Especially since some people complain that I edit too many posts - although this happened to me mostly on a different site, not on Mathematics - having such stats might sometimes be useful.)
Since we're talking about bumping old posts, sometimes before doing a batch of edits, I also check whether many old posts have been bumped just before that: math.stackexchange.com/… (But I don't always do that.)
Checking that book a little bit, it seems that the author simply uses this name for a multilinear alternating form. And later it is shown that such function is unique - up to a scalar multiple.
@MartinSleziak Then it doesn't look like a useful tag. Since there are only 17 questions, I think the easiest thing to do is to remove it manually (I don't think it's worth having a synonym for this).
I've already removed the tag for two questions that were not even about determinants.
@ArnaudD. Do you think I should bring this up on meta? Or is this case clear enough even without meta discussion - and we should simply start with retagging?
@MartinSleziak I would say it's sufficiently clear and we can start retagging. There are a few questions where the determinant is seen as a function, but I don't think this is really sufficient to justify the existence of the tag.
I doubt this would attract a lot of meta discussion, in any case.
In fact I've now removed the tag from this question, which had been bumped recently anyway (which is probably why we're talking about this tag now).
@Andrews I just created the semisimple-lie-algebra tag. There seems to be (weak) support for the creation of the tag (math.meta.stackexchange.com/a/30067/468350). I suggested last week that @Andrews create the tag, but he never replied, so I went forward with it.
It's ultimately your call, but I'd wait a bit. IMO opinion there is no urgency - whether the tag is created today or a week later, there's not much of a difference.
In any case, you're probably right that if somebody objected to the tag, they had some time to comment in the tag management thread. I hoped that Saad would comment either here or in chat - since they removed the previous instance of the tag.
@XanderHenderson A minor question - is it better to call it semisimple-lie-algebra or semisimple-lie-algebras? If plural is the preferred form for the tag names, it is easier to correct it while the tag is new.
Of course, we would have to wait until the singular form is removed by the system. (Since any user who tries to create a new tag for (some-objects) will be blocked from doing so if a tag called (some-object) already exists.
To do this manually means removing the tag from all questions, waiting until script removes that singular version from the system, create a plural version on the next day.