Tagging - 2019-03-25

« first day (2477 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1864 days later) »

2:31 AM

@Andrews Do you mean Ted Shifrin's post in the thread with tag warnings: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/21873/… ?

Martin Sleziak

3:07 AM

BTW congrats to the Copy Editor badge!

1 hour later…

Martin Sleziak

4:33 AM

@Andrews Personally I consider online-resources to be useful. Could you clarify a bit what you mean by saying that it's being replaced by reference-request?

In SEDE I only found 7 questions where this tag was removed at some point: data.stackexchange.com/math/query/960536/…

Martin Sleziak

5:03 AM

@AsafKaragila I see that the question about this tag (Is the decision problems tag needed?) was closed as a duplicate.

I am not sure it is a good idea - if the tag is likely to have more extensive discussion, then it's probably better if it has a separate question with more space for the discussion than just comments under the answer.

In any case, as the thread was started after your recommendation, I wanted to ask for your opinion (rather then just reopening it using dupehammer without consulting anybody).

2 hours later…

Andrews

7:05 AM

@MartinSleziak Sorry, I simply mean users are using '

... are using reference-request and book-recommendation now

@MartinSleziak Yes, exactly

What about other tags mentioned above?

Asaf Karagila

@MartinSleziak I saw that, and I also felt that it might be better to allow separate threads for discussions like that. But I also want other users to step up and voice opinions. Otherwise I feel more like a despot...

Andrews

I see a tag reference-works, maybe it's synonymous with reference-request?

Asaf Karagila

@Andrews REF works is a tool to manage bibliography, if my memory serves me right.

Apparently not what this tag is about.

Huh. Weird tag. Why is it even there?

3 hours later…

Martin Sleziak

10:36 AM

I don't think that reference-works and reference-request are synonymous.

The tag reference-works was created by Michael Hardy back in 2014: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/3740?m=16633386#16633386 chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/3740?m=16659849#16659849

The way I see those tags - reference-works is for a "handbook" for some given area. For example: Reference for general-topology. (Engelking's book is a good example.)

The textbook-recommendation would be typically for a textbook - as opposed to general reference.

The tag reference-request might ask for a reference about a specific result.

@Andrews Well, it is explicitly mentioned in the tag-info that book-recommendation should be used together with reference-request, so that's perfectly fine.

Here is a discussion on meta which lead to creation of the book-recommendation tag. You can find a few other related discussions if you look at the linked questions.

@AsafKaragila I have reopened that question. We'll se how other users react.

Arnaud D.

I'm impressed (but not really surprised) that you have that gold badge :)

Martin Sleziak

10:55 AM

There are several users with gold discussion badge. At the moment, there are no other gold tag badges on meta.

Andrews

reference-works and online-resources are much less used now, anyway. Also for faq

Martin Sleziak

Low frequency of usage does not automatically mean a problematic tag.

I suppose that there will be less questions on mirror-symmetry than on limits. Still, mirror-symmetry might be a useful tag.

In fact, I'd say that for faq it's inherent in the intended use of that there will not bee too many questions with that tag.

Andrews

Is invariance too broad?

Arnaud D.

@MartinSleziak I saw that, but I've also noted that you are the only user with that badge who has never been a moderator (although quid and Asaf got the badge before becoming moderators) :)

But to switch to something on-topic for this room : so far I've wanted to wait for more reaction to my proposal about accessible/locally presentable categories, but it doesn't seem to get much reaction. Nobody has objected, but it only got 3 upvotes. Do you think this shows sufficient approval for me to go ahead and create the tag?

Andrews

11:13 AM

We have so many differenct invariants, and 8 tags about invariance now.

invariant-theory, invariance, knot-invariants, invariant-subspace, geometric-invariant-theory, geometric-invariant, set-invariance, graph-invariants

Arnaud D.

@Andrews Wow, that does seem quite messy. In particular, the tag-excerpts don't make much distinction between geometric-invariant-theory, invariant-theory and geometric-invariant.

On the other hand, I'd say that knot-invariants, graph-invariants and perhaps invariant-subspace are fine.

Andrews

11:35 AM

set-invariance doesn't even have a info or usage.

Martin Sleziak

11:51 AM

The tag set-invariance was created in May 2018 by Rodrigo de Azevedo.

May 30 '18 at 11:00, by Martin Sleziak

A new tag set-invariance was created by Rodrigo de Azevedo. Possibly with the intended meaning from dynamical systems?

Martin Sleziak

12:34 PM

@RodrigodeAzevedo The fact that the tag (set-invariance) has empty tag info was brought up in chat. As far as I can tell, you are the tag creator. Would you be willing to find some time to suggest the tag-excerpt/tag-wiki so that it is a bit clearer what the tag is intended for? Thanks a lot! — Martin Sleziak 21 secs ago

Andrews

Is legendre-symbol a good tag? Does mathematical symbol deserve a tag?

Martin Sleziak

12:57 PM

A: Tag management 2018

I've noticed we have both legendre-symbol and quadratic-residues. Would it make sense to make the former an alias of the latter?

There are now synonym suggestions (jacobi-symbol) $\to$ (quadratic-residues) and (legendre-symbol) $\to$ (quadratic-residues). (One of them was suggested by barto, the other one by me.) Users with sufficient score in the tag can vote for/against them here. Maybe it could be useful to include this information into your post - that could attract attention of users who might vote on those synonyms. (And perhaps attract also some users who have something to add to this discussion.) — Martin Sleziak May 29 '18 at 6:24

Personally, I think that Jacobi symbol and Legendre symbol are quite important. Still, I find Henning Makholm's suggestion to put them under quadratic-residues quite reasonable.

BTW I appreciate your enthusiasm about improvement in tag system. However, I have some doubts whether I (and other users) will be able to respond to all of them if the questions come at this rate. :-)

As you can see, some of the tags you've mentioned have been discussed on meta before.

In any case, it's good to see more activity in this room than usually. (I should probably get back to preparing for my lecture.)

Andrews

1:30 PM

@MartinSleziak Sorry for disturbing you.

I'll search on meta more in future.

This shows mirror-symmetry was created before and deleted for some reason.

Martin Sleziak

@Andrews That is certainly no problem. (If it was something I considered disturbing, I would not reply.)

@Andrews Yes, I've mentioned this here in chat: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/49622877#49622877 Actually, that's why I pinged Alexander Gruber.

15 hours ago, by Alexander Gruber

@MartinSleziak To tell you the truth, I don't remember why I removed that.

15 hours ago, by Alexander Gruber

The tag seems like a good idea to me now, particularly considering there are a few other examples of questions that would benefit from it.

4 hours later…