When MathOverflow began we decided to start using arXiv classification and created corresponding tags. These are still the most broadly used tags on MathOverflow. However, the usage of some these tags differs slightly from the arXiv description, so it's unclear what we should put in the tag wikis.

I see three main options:

  1. Revert to the original arXiv descriptions.
  2. Keep the tag names but use our own descriptions that match our usage.
  3. Discard the arXiv names and use our own names with our own descriptions.
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Oh, so that's why the tag names have prefixes. I like option #2 -- tag excerpts get shown while looking for tags to enter, a short description(instead of a list) is helpful. (However, I can see the advantage of using lists of subtopics) $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 17:56
  • $\begingroup$ I started copying arXiv descriptions for common tags since that's already an improvement over nothing at all. Apparently, I can only do a few per day, so that will take a while... $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 18:36
  • $\begingroup$ re:few-per-day:Huh? You're a moderator, this should not be rate limited. re:improvement: I agree. The question is, do we just keep it like that or add more improvements? Also, any objections to me doing the same if you are rate limited? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 18:38
  • $\begingroup$ Apparently there should not be any X-tag-wiki-edits-per-day restriction for mods (I checked with Shog9). If you encounter it, please report it in the Teacher's Lounge or as a bug on meta. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 18:46
  • $\begingroup$ You're right, I was blocked by a pending edit but I had to click a few random things before I could see it. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 18:51
  • $\begingroup$ OK. Took care of the top ones. My cut & paste skills are tired now... $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 19:03
  • $\begingroup$ No probs, I'll do a few more if I get time. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 19:07
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I am still in favor of keeping the tag names as they are (the discussion over tea). A small distinguishable set of classification tags is essential (at least for me). Btw, don't forget that you can now define tag synonyms. :) $\endgroup$
    – Kaveh
    Commented Jun 26, 2013 at 19:36
  • $\begingroup$ I also like option #2. $\endgroup$
    – user5810
    Commented Jun 30, 2013 at 9:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is not completly on-topic here, I originally wanted to ask a separate question, but decided on quickly asking you here: it seems to me at the moment these tags are nowwhere documented. By contrast on the old MO they were very prominent on the Ask Question page. The "nowhere" is more for the documentation discussion, but I'd like to know something else: do you know if we could (at least in principle) get the current text 'in the tag box' while it is empty changed to mention them? $\endgroup$
    – user9072
    Commented Jul 25, 2013 at 16:10


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .