Timeline for Are questions about "defect chemistry" more appropriate somewhere else than chem.SE?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:57 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://chemistry.stackexchange.com/ with https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 31, 2015 at 21:45 | comment | added | Steeven |
Ok. I agree: The last tag is too specific, yes. defects could include impurities, while a third good one would be dopants. This would include something like acceptors and donors, but I would say broad enough to be it's own tag. (I added those to the text.)
|
|
| May 31, 2015 at 21:38 | comment | added | Nicolau Saker Neto |
For example, I (personally) think the first four of your example tags are good, though perhaps individually underpopulated, with the possible exception of impurities (maybe we can use defects as a catch-all synonym for the others, for now?). The fifth may be a bit too specific to warrant a tag just for itself.
|
|
| May 31, 2015 at 21:37 | comment | added | Nicolau Saker Neto | Once you gain enough reputation (300), you can create new tags freely by simply adding them to any question's tags. Further reputation will provide more tagging powers. The community eventually adjusts to new tags, though at times some meta discussion is good to sort things out. | |
| May 31, 2015 at 21:24 | comment | added | Steeven | In regard to new tags being added, is this a proces going on when specific topics are popular enough and "asked" enough? | |
| May 31, 2015 at 21:23 | vote | accept | Steeven | ||
| May 31, 2015 at 21:23 | comment | added | Steeven | Pioneer, hu :) Thank you for a good answer to this doubt. I wasn't aware that the site is young; any material on any site naturally takes time to arrive. I will see what future brings. | |
| May 31, 2015 at 21:00 | history | answered | Nicolau Saker Neto | CC BY-SA 3.0 |