« first day (3395 days earlier)      last day (505 days later) » 

Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
4:06 AM
2
Q: Removing "tag-removed" tag

Noah SchweberCurrently, contra its intention the "tag-removed" tag has more than $300$ associated questions, many of which are upvoted and have actually contentful tags. This seems like a situation ripe for mass tag removal; however, doing that via the normal process would result in bumping many questions to ...

support tags
Actually I don't really understand why there is the need for a "tag-removed" tag in the first place: why can't a question have an empty set of tags? Is this just a technical kludge due to the implementation of SE? — Federico Poloni 11 hours ago
@FedericoPoloni Doesn't the post I linked a few comments about your answer the question: "Why there is a need for a tag-removed tag?"
As far as I can tell, the way to remove a tag without bumping is called burnination, see the "dictionary" in this post. However, I suppose that before that, the questions which have only that tag would need manual retagging. Somewhat related post on Meta Stack Exchange: Burnination vs. merging into a specific tag — Martin Sleziak Mar 8, 2021 at 21:51
4
Q: Burnination vs. merging into a specific tag

MartinWhen there is a tag which should be removed completely and removing the tag manually would cause bumping too many questions, the typical solution is burnination. Perhaps in some cases, the moderators can merge the tag into another tag. (If all of those questions fit into an already existing tag.)...

discussion tags burninate-system untagged-questions
Basically, the MO moderators typically use the tag tag-removed for purposes which could (more-or-less) be done without using that tag - but a help from Stack Exchange staff would be needed.
Although my impression is that the MO mods now use merging into this tag less frequently.
It seems that untagged could be used instead of tag-removed - but I do not see much difference in that.
Re Q2: Moderators can do this; I just tested it. I do not think it is an intended use-case though; I am not sure it is even intentional that a moderator can do this. — quid Apr 23, 2018 at 14:39
Maybe a minor advantage would be that untagged cannot be added by a regular user. (And, consequently, anybody editing such question would be forced to remove or replace untagged by another tag.)
20
Q: What causes a question to be tagged as [untagged]?

Kate GregoryI had thought that any question tagged untagged was as a result of migration. But What happened to the village in Contagion? was not migrated from anywhere as far as I can tell, so how did it end up untagged? Perhaps it was asked by someone with the tag creation privilege, but after a long enoug...

discussion tags faq-proposed untagged-questions
23
A: What causes a question to be tagged as [untagged]?

ChrisFWhat are the various ways that a question can end up tagged as untagged? Tags that only exist on one question are automatically removed after 6 months (12 months on meta sites) by a monthly script, unless someone has written or proposed a wiki for the tag (including rejected proposals). As well, ...

Maybe the answer to: "Is this just a technical kludge due to the implementation of SE?" Would be: "It is a technical kludge due to non-standard attitudes of the MO community (compared to other Stack Exchange sites)."
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
4:31 AM
One can do a similar stats for tag-removed - but one should keep in mind that in many cases the user used completely different tag and it was only later merged by a moderator.
 
The Amplitwist
The Amplitwist
It looks like zbMATH have changed the format of their review links. Earlier, they were of the form https://zbmath.org/?q=an:NNNN.NNNNN but now they are of the form https://zbmath.org/NNNN.NNNNN. That is, the part ?q=an: does not appear in the new format.
The links in the old format still work, though. I'm curious whether the zbMATH review links inserted in the new format will continue to be tracked back.
I've suggested an edit fixing a broken link to springerlink.com in which I've added such a link in the new form. Let's see if it appears on the corresponding review page on zbMATH Open, once (and if) the suggested edit is accepted, and a few days have passed.
If it doesn't, then maybe one can ping Isabel Beckenbach as a heads-up.
As an aside, I've been meaning to ask them about whether backlinks are also tracked in comments, since I know that in some cases they aren't, but I seem to recall finding instances where they were tracked.
@TheAmplitwist (For further context, they mention in their answer to "Are there policies to respect in order for MathOverflow Q&As to be tracked back in relevant zbMATH Open reviews?" that they are "in charge of the MathOverflow backlinks at zbMATH Open".)
 
The Amplitwist
The Amplitwist
5:05 AM
I've suggested another edit fixing a broken link to springerlink.com and with links to zbMATH reviews added in the new format.
Of course, the "Insert citation" button in the editing toolbar still uses the old format for the review links, just as it still uses the format dx.doi.org for the DOIs of articles (as noted recently in the main chatroom).
@MartinSleziak Perhaps your edit summary here should say "the question will be bumped anyway", since it's not yet been bumped by my suggested edit being accepted (i.e., it's still pending in review). ;)
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
5:44 AM
Well, yes. Not a major difference - I was too lazy and simply used the edit summary that I already had at hand.
@TheAmplitwist I suppose one could request to fix this in the citation helper, too.
I do not know whether I should simply mention this in the post about the DOI links - or whether there should be a separate post about zbMATH.
12
Q: Could the citation helper include DOI-links as https rather than http?

MartinThe citation helper usually includes some link in the citation. Specifically, it includes a link to zbMATH. And a link to a paper - quite often as DOI. However, the DOI-links are in the "old" format http://dx.doi.org/DOI rather than https://doi.org/DOI. For example, I have just tested this on Mat...

feature-request status-review hyperlinks ssl citation
Maybe the best thing to do is to wait and see whether both formats work for backtracks. (This is probably good to know before requesting any changes.)
 
The Amplitwist
The Amplitwist
6:21 AM
Agreed.
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
6:43 AM
Just to have the relevant post about trackbacks from arxiv at hand.
8
Q: Are there policies to respect in order for MathOverflow Q&As to be tracked back in relevant zbMATH Open reviews?

Daniele TampieriAre there policies to respect in order for MathOverflow Q&As to be tracked back in relevant zbMATH Open reviews? I am asking this since I noticed that all questions and answers to which I contributed, fully citing sources with their MR and/or Zbl reviews as it is my custom to do so, have all been...

discussion citations trackbacks
23
A: Are there policies to respect in order for MathOverflow Q&As to be tracked back in relevant zbMATH Open reviews?

Isabel BeckenbachI am in charge of the MathOverflow backlinks at zbMATH Open and can explain how we fetch them: We are using a small Python script, which uses the Stack Exchange API, to get all question, answers and comments citing some zbmath document on mathoverflow.net. We use urlextract and regular expression...

 
 
5 hours later…
Federico Poloni
Federico Poloni
11:29 AM
@MartinSleziak Not really; I don't see any reason why a post can't stay without tags in it.
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
@FedericoPoloni Then I misunderstood your question.
What exists on "standard" sites - and appeared on MO several times as you can see above - is that a question which is "without tags" will automatically be tagged as untagged. You can see an example here: mathoverflow.net/posts/371531/revisions
 
Federico Poloni
Federico Poloni
@MartinSleziak Wait tho, do you mean math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1381/… ?
I don't find a link with the text "why there is a need for..."
just "what is the role of...:
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
If we're looking at Mathematics Meta, I think that why was tag-removed created is explained nicely here: Could having (tag-removed) tag be useful?
In any case, it seems that you meant a different question that I was answering.
I was answering the question: "Why have MO mods decided to use tag-removed?" (In various places where no tags would be needed.)
And you are asking: "Can a question have no tags? If not, why not?"
^ So this is actually your question?
 
Federico Poloni
Federico Poloni
both in fact
What is the practical advantage of tag-removed? Why would anyone, for instance, want to search for it?
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
Well, I do not have better answer to "question with no tags" that the system automatically uses untagged in such cases.
Of course, if you have time you can have a look at Meta Stack Exchange to see whether you find more there. Some starting point might be: What causes a question to be tagged as [untagged]?
@FedericoPoloni Let me be perfectly clear, that tag-removed is not necessary from the viewpoint of the SE software - the decision to use it was made by MO mods (and MO userbase).
The same on other sites which use or used such tag. As I've mentioned in this question, such tag use to be on Mathematics. And there is such tag on Theoretical Computer Science.
4
Q: Burnination vs. merging into a specific tag

MartinWhen there is a tag which should be removed completely and removing the tag manually would cause bumping too many questions, the typical solution is burnination. Perhaps in some cases, the moderators can merge the tag into another tag. (If all of those questions fit into an already existing tag.)...

discussion tags burninate-system untagged-questions
Certainly, nobody would search for tag-removed.
 
Federico Poloni
Federico Poloni
11:39 AM
Its tag wiki says "something is needed to have some tag, which is enforced by the software, so this tag is used", which seems false since untagged exists.
 
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
I am not sure how the situation was in SE 1.0 - so maybe at that point in might have been true.
But as far as I can tell, the main use case for tag-removed used to be if a moderator wanted to remove a tag without bumping. This was done by merging into tag-removed.
I can explain in more detail - but stop me, if you are already familiar with this. (So that I do not write here a lengthy explanation of something you already know.)
For example, calculus was removed by merging into tag-removed at some point.
Are you familiar with this use case, or should I try to give a more detailed explanation?
I will at least include a link to some older messages in chat, and two quid's answer on MathOverflow Meta and Mathematics Meta.
But I can go through the process which most often leads to posts tagged with tag-removed here on MO, if needed.
Just let me know whether it's needed - or whether I am already talking about something you already know.
Or something for which the explanations linked above are entirely sufficient. (I am aware that I'm putting here too many links - sorry for that.)
Concerning untagged, I should have explicitly mentioned that untagged cannot be added by a regular user. (In this sense, tag-removed is different - any regular user can change tags to include this tag. And this happens quite often for off-topic questions.)
Or maybe I can try to use this question as an example:
19
Q: Generalizations of "standard" calculus

Zev ChonolesWe have the usual analogy between infinitesimal calculus (integrals and derivatives) and finite calculus (sums and forward differences), and also the generalization of infinitesimal calculus to fractional calculus (which allows for real and even complex powers of the differential operator). Have ...

tag-removed big-picture soft-question fa.functional-analysis
This was originally tagged (calculus) - but when that tag was deemed unsuitable for the site, the moderators replaced it by (removed). I wonder whether (differential-calculus) might be suitable for this question. (And, at the same time, it isn't really necessary to keep the (tag-removed) among the tags.) — Martin Sleziak Nov 1 at 4:52
One can check in Wayback Machine that the above question used to be tagged calculus.
As a result of discussion on meta, it was decided that calculus should be removed.
One option to do would be manual retagging - that would bump all questions to the frontpage.
Another option would be burnination - that cannot be done by local mods, one would need help from SE staff.
So the MO mods simply merged calculus into tag-removed.
As a result:
1. The tag calculus was no longer present in the system. (Good - that's what they wanted.)
2. No questions were bumped in the proces. (That's great.)
3. But all questions that had the tag calculus before the merging now have the tag tag-removed. (This is not so great - but it is a consequence of the fact that the mods opted for merging rather than for burnination.)
There are several places where the difference between merging and burnination is explained.
As I remember the best those places where I tried to give some explanation, they are here: chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/10243/2022/10/17 and Burnination vs. merging into a specific tag. And the end of this post: What to do with the synonyms for the deprecated tags?
 
 
1 hour later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
1:07 PM
Maybe I should make extra clear that I am not defending the existence of tag-removed - I am merely describing for which purpose the tag is (was) used by the MO users (mostly by the mods).
Despite the fact that MO mods were using the tag removed, it seems that they weren't too happy about that:
FWIW tag-removed has been both my best friend and my worst enemy for over a decade... — François G. Dorais Mar 8, 2021 at 22:05
I have mentioned mainly the usage by the mods - some regular users use this tag too.
Mostly for off-topic posts and spam posts. Since those posts are eventually going to be deleted anyway, I don't think that retagging them with tag tag-removed is actually needed.
It is hard to judge, but it seems that the opinion of the MO mods on merging into tag-removed somewhat changed - AFAICT they haven't used it for a long time. And even in some recent discussions concerning removal of some tags, no moderator suggested this action.
I might try a bit later to write an answer to the question which was bumped that includes an explanation how the tag tag-removed is used on MO.
 
 
2 hours later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
2:59 PM
@MartinSleziak The tag on-topic was added - so I can delete that comment.
5
Q: Mathoverflow for finding the name of mathematical concepts

Penelope BenenatiI am used to posting on MathOverflow problems with questions. However, now I am looking for the name of a mathematical object that I think already exists (and I would be happy to find reference recommendations about it). Is MathOverflow appropriate for such questions, although I am not asking to ...

discussion on-topic
 
 
3 hours later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
5:40 PM
@FedericoPoloni I do not know whether I managed to make things clearer - in any case, the decision to post the answer on MO was partly motivated by the fact that you asked about this tag.
0
A: Removing "tag-removed" tag

Martin SleziakFrom the comments it seems that some users do not know why and how the tag tag-removed is used on MO. So let me address this first. (At least briefly - some of the links below might add a bit more context.) Regular users sometimes use this tag for questions which are off-topic or outright spam. ...

I am sure that quid can express things better than me. So looking at their answer on Mathematics Meta might reveal some things which might speak in favor of having the tag tag-removed. (Despite the fact that the conclusion of that post is not to create such a tag on Mathematics.)
7
A: Could having (tag-removed) tag be useful?

quidThere is a dedicated way to delete tags without bumping, the jargon for this is 'burninate.' It is just that this functionality is not exposed to users and per site moderators, only SE staff can do it. This restriction is intentional, and I do not think we should introduce something that basica...

And there is another answer by quid on this topic on MathOverflow Meta, too.
1
A: 'Tag-removed' tags where they possibly shouldn't be

user9072The usage of tag-removed was two-fold: as an 'empty' tag for massively off-topic and mistagged questions. as a tool to 'delete' tags via merging them into it. Due to the second use-case numerous legitimate questions also got this tag. I think it could make sense to go over this list and reta...

 
 
1 hour later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
7:03 PM
 
 
2 hours later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
8:40 PM
9 hours ago, by Federico Poloni
Its tag wiki says "something is needed to have some tag, which is enforced by the software, so this tag is used", which seems false since untagged exists.
Maybe I'll add a comment about this.
If a regular user wants to leave a question with no tags, it is not possible.
If a regular user wants to change the tag to untagged it is not possible. (Let's leave aside the situations when such tag is added by software - or possibly by a mod, as a result of merging.)
Since some regular users want to leave questions with "no standard tags", they use tag-removed for this purpose.
Apparently, some users use this tag for spam posts:
in MathOverflow, Nov 10 at 13:18, by YCor
@MartinSleziak If I see any recent post with tag-removed, I deduce that quite likely I should have to make some action and will then open it (normally, so as to retag / to vote closure / to vote deletion / to flag as spam).
And you can see that some spam question do have such tag: data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/1669127/…
But not many - most spam questions are deleted without any edits on their tags: data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/1456632/…
Some users use tag-removed for off-topic questions. Since you have 10k+ reputation point you can view deleted questions - but even from the SEDE query it is clear that there are quite a few deleted posts with this tag: data.stackexchange.com/mathoverflow/query/883845/…
 
Federico Poloni
Federico Poloni
9:34 PM
@MartinSleziak Thanks, this helps; now the status quo is much clearer to me.
 
 
1 hour later…
Martin Sleziak
Martin Sleziak
10:38 PM
This feature request is in some way connected to the above: Moderators should be able to remove / burninate a tag themselves
156
Q: Moderators should be able to remove / burninate a tag themselves

slhckWe're doing some spring cleaning on Super User, which involves disambiguating tags, merging them, creating synonyms etc. However, one of the most troublesome things is removing a tag. Often, it's easy enough to agree that a tag should be burninated completely, possibly even blacklisted. But the...

feature-request tags moderator-tools moderator-abilities
If this was implemented, mods could remove tags directly (without needing help from Stack Exchange staff).
At the same time, in the past we have seen that MO mods are not familiar with some aspects of the Stack Exchange software and they made various mistakes in the past.
So that raises the question whether it is wise to give more powerful tools to the mods.
 

« first day (3395 days earlier)      last day (505 days later) »