I read through the tag-merging and synonyms thread today, and was reminded that we have three different, closely-related tags, namely: , , and . I was confused by this, but am willing to stand by the reasoning given for the distinction there and in other threads.

Later, though, I discovered that the tag lists as a "related tag", which is ridiculous! How is it that this happened, and can anything be done to remove this spurious link?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In fact (integration) and (integral) are now synonyms. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Nov 1 '13 at 5:36
  • $\begingroup$ I'm sure someone was just confused about the domain over which their integral was defined. $\endgroup$ – nomen Nov 10 '13 at 8:11

As far as I am aware, the "Related Tags" are those that are tagged along with the first tag in some question. When you were writing the question above there was one question which was tagged both and . (This has since been changed.)

Once the system recovers, the "Related Tags" for should no longer show . (It appears it already has.)

  • $\begingroup$ Excellent! Good to know it's that simple a fix. I'll be able to take care of it on my own if I encounter such a thing in the future. $\endgroup$ – Cameron Buie Nov 1 '13 at 4:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @CameronBuie: Good catch! The "related tag" list is indeed a great way to discover questions that are either (i) hopeless mistagged or (ii) extremely interesting! $\endgroup$ – Willie Wong Nov 1 '13 at 8:22
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @WillieWong It would certainly be an interesting question if someone could make sense of something like "integrating along curves in integrable modules for quantum groups over integral domains". $\endgroup$ – Tobias Kildetoft Nov 1 '13 at 8:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .