Tagging - 2017-11-25

« first day (1992 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2345 days later) »

8:18 AM

There seem to be two notations for a dihedral group of order $2n$. $$D_n\quad and \quad D_{2n}$$ Both have logical rationales, the underlying cycle (or polygon) for one and the order of the group for the other. The Wikipedia article on dihedral groups claims the first is used in geometric context...

4 hours later…

Martin Sleziak

12:12 PM

A: Tag management 2017

Pluralize division-ring.

2 hours later…

Martin Sleziak

1:59 PM

There's also division-algebras. We may consider merging something into noncommutative-algebra, though I don't think that's necessary. — barto 2 hours ago

3 hours later…

Martin Sleziak

5:27 PM

@quid I wonder whether it might be reasonable to rename riemann-stieltjes-integral to stieltjes-integral or whether we should wait a bit more whether there will be more feedback in the related post on meta.

A: Riemann-Stieltjes Integral tag

I put this in a comment, and @Martin Sleziak suggested that I make it an answer, it here it is again (with better formatting): There is also such a thing as a Lebesgue–Stieltjes integral[^1], and one might want to ask in general about Stieltjesization (if I may say that) about any notion of inte...

The question is now already older than 14 days, so it is no longer in community bulletin. So probably it is getting less views now than before. (Which is why I think that most likely not much is going to be added to that discussion.)

Of course, the renaming/merging would need moderators - it cannot be done by regular users. (Of course, it is possible to remove all existing instances of the tag and add to all of them the new tag.)

Although I see you have your hands full elsewhere - just a reminder of this older post, where you also joined the discussion in comments.

quid

@MartinSleziak yes, I think it is reasonable. The questions is how to proceed exactly. The creator of the tag will get a badge down the road. I am not sure anybody cares, but in case someone does I do not want to be seen as having grabbed that badge via creating the tag and merging. That is to say, I'd have a preference that somebody else creates the tag. I'll then be happy to merge.

Martin Sleziak

Tag creation privileges comes with 1000 rep points.

So of the people involved in that discussion, Toby Bartels is out of the question.

I think that the original R-S tag was created by John Ma. He already has taxonomist badge.

And even without checking, I think both you an me already have taxonomist badge, so neither of us can gain a new badge in this way.

@quid If you really think the badge could be an issue here, you can suggest to gt6989b that they might create tag.

In a sense, they might deserve it for bringing the tag up on meta.

Personally, I am not really sure to which extent this really is an issue.

I see:

I think we'll rename to just stieltjes-integeral. If you care for a taxonmist badge, you could create it somewhere and I'll merge. If not I'll jsut proceed to do it. — quid ♦ 43 secs ago

quid

@MartinSleziak done. I agree it is not that important. But more minor things created drama.

Martin Sleziak

5:42 PM

Ok, so basically nothing more to do about this, until there is some response for the OP.

Thanks for the quick response!

quid

@MartinSleziak yes, except if they don't reply in which case we must not forget to still do it.

You are welcome. Thanks for the reminder.

« first day (1992 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2345 days later) »

all rooms