« first day (2502 days earlier)      last day (410 days later) » 

7:44 AM
@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.
 
@ArnaudD. I noticed that too. Thanks for your reminder!
 
8:42 AM
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?
 
23 hours ago, by Martin Sleziak
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

Tag for dimension of vector spaces

Nov 28 '16 at 14:05, 34 minutes total – 40 messages, 3 users, 0 stars

Bookmarked Nov 28 '16 at 14:45 by Martin Sleziak

 
@MartinSleziak Thanks, I'd skimmed the yesterday's discussion to see what had been said about this but I missed that message.
 
The tag was created some time ago (in fact once in 2014 and once in 2016) - but if was removed both times. chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/3740/2016/11/27 data.stackexchange.com/math/query/927958/… data.stackexchange.com/math/query/883845/…
Now there is a tag called . This tag was discussed also on meta: Creation of a Hamel basis tag.
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.
In both cases, relatively quickly removed by Willie Wong: math.stackexchange.com/posts/48974/revisions math.stackexchange.com/posts/478976/revisions
 
@MartinSleziak That makes sense. It's true that there are lots of linear algebra tags.
 
The tag was created and removed in the past. chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/3740/2017/11/9 The tag is now a synonym of - although it seems that no everybody things it's a good idea.
 
8:57 AM
Another option would be to consider that 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."
 
Aug 25 '18 at 23:11, by quid
Does it make sense that is a synonym of ? 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.)
in CRUDE, Nov 28 '16 at 14:18, by Daniel Fischer
Would be sufficiently clear that one is meaning the cardinality of a Hamel basis?
in CRUDE, Nov 28 '16 at 14:33, by Martin Sleziak
@DanielFischer Perhaps we can leave further discussion about for another time? I should get back to my grading.
 
9:25 AM
@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.
 
@MartinSleziak Thanks! Btw your advice is also helpful for getting the Archaeologist badge.
as retagging alone will not increase the no. of post edited.
 
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).
 
Oh, don't take a joke too seriously...
 
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.)
 
 
2 hours later…
11:42 AM
Looking at some of the older questions, several of them refer to a book Linear Algebra by Werner H. Greub.
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.
So it seems basically to be about .
 
12:00 PM
@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.
 
12:19 PM
@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).
 
12:48 PM
0
A: Tag management 2019

GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會Proposal: create tag "stochastic-programming" Reason: It's an area of research. There's over a hundred stochastic programming questions.

 
1:11 PM
@Andrews I just created the 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.
in Math Mods' Office, Apr 12 at 16:16, by Xander Henderson
@Andrews As a very rough draft, I would propose something like the following for the tag description:
In case it is deleted again: tag description and tag excerpt.
@YuiToCheng Heh... I was just about to make that edit on the meta thread. :P
Thanks.
 
 
1 hour later…
2:44 PM
@XanderHenderson Maybe I am the person to blame for that.
Apr 10 at 5:46, by Martin Sleziak
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 or ? 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.
 
@MartinSleziak It seems to me that the plural form would be more coherent, since most tags use (some-objects).
Although there are some odd exceptions : we have a singular for and , but plural for , and .
 
3:56 PM
@MartinSleziak Oh, shoot. I didn't think of plural vs singular. Is it possible to edit the name of a tag, or does it require deleting and recreating?
Ah, normies can't change tag names.
It requires a moderator:
51
Q: How to rename a tag?

BЈовићWhat do I need to do to rename a tag? I see some people post a question here and ask for a tag to be renamed. Is there some other way?

 
4:43 PM
@XanderHenderson I think I have answered your question a few moments before you asked it: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/49986109#49986109
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.
 
5:11 PM
@MartinSleziak Indeed. Alternatively, it seems that per-site moderators can actually change tag names. I flagged a question.
 

« first day (2502 days earlier)      last day (410 days later) »