5
$\begingroup$

If one searches the word -theore in Tags one find some tags with the name of well known theorems as or . Also if one type lemm one finds only three tags, that are , and .

I understand that is good have tags for special statements, but for example why there is no a tag for (prime-number-theorem)?

Question. It is because it more convenient have tags for objects or theories (like as (derivatives) or (graph-theory)) instead of for statements? It is only a curiosity to known good criteria to create new tags, that categorize our questions. Thanks in advance.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Tags, as I see them, have three major roles to play, under ideal settings:

  1. They hint the reader what sort of topic the question will be, before opening it. Thus, using correct tags will help increasing the exposure of the question to its target audience.

  2. They help partition the database into more manageable parts, and eases up searching, browsing, and using the site.

  3. They help the answerer calibrate the level of the answer. If someone asks about continuity of a function using , the answer will be different than the same question tagged under or .

Having too many tags on the site causes too much fragmentation, and may lead to questions having less exposure than ideally. So having specialized tags for specialized topics should be introduced when they help compensate for an actual problem.

The reason is that it is likely that some new users will put a specialized tag as their only tag. If you have a tag for the prime numbers theorem, and only three people follow it, a question which only have this tag, would have received a lot more attention if it had been tagged under (for example).

It is true that when a tag becomes sufficiently big, it can be useful to add specialized tags to help users navigate that mass of questions. But this still runs the risk of underexposure if not used correctly. And if something can be misused, it will be.

So if a tag does not help searching for data, does not help predict the content of the question, and does not help the answerers to anticipate the level of answer... it should definitely not be introduced.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Very thanks much for your answer, in few days I accept an answer. It is incredible that your thoughts are very clear. Also, only as a comment could be nice have a map of this site like as the known internet map, showing what tags are the more interesting, in size, for the users, and what are the relationships with the other tags. $\endgroup$ – user243301 Jun 23 '16 at 11:15
  • $\begingroup$ I spent the last six years (well, almost) on this site, and I was involved in tagging for the better part of that period. It shouldn't surprise anyone that I have a clear and [hopefully] cogent approach to tagging, then. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jun 23 '16 at 11:31
  • $\begingroup$ I did not know this . Thank you very much , very good job!!! $\endgroup$ – user243301 Jun 23 '16 at 11:41
  • $\begingroup$ @user243301 By "internet map" you mean something similar to the graphs shown in these posts: A Graph Map of Math.SE and An interactive graph of Math.SE tags? $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Jun 23 '16 at 14:07
  • $\begingroup$ Yes is the same graph, very thanks much @MartinSleziak one more time. $\endgroup$ – user243301 Jun 23 '16 at 15:45

You must log in to answer this question.