5
$\begingroup$

The tag seems to be both ambiguous and pointless in light of the existence of its two sub-tags in and . Therefore, it might be a good idea to make a synonym of and merging it into the latter.

Related: Can we ban the satellites tag?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

Agreed!

If I may suggest we also rather use singular instead of their plural versions, and not use the tag at all (when you type "satellite", both available tags will show in the list to select the proper one from).

Have this post count as support to abolish the tag and instead use more descriptive and less ambiguous tags in their singular form - and .

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

I am going for the unpopular option, for the sake of completeness. Feel free to vote down.

I disagree.

A while ago, I made my point for introducing the tags and in the first place. However, for e.g. the purposes of orbital mechanics, physics applies equally. So I can imagine questions, which ask for (singular or plural) in general.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Good point, but I'm not entirely convinced any "satellite" tags would even be needed with questions about "orbital mechanics". It's already implied there's two mass bodies involved, and for the most part doesn't matter how we call them (and where it does, the more specific tag that applies to the question can be used). Plus, it's kinda fun downvoting here, where it doesn't hurt. :P $\endgroup$ – TildalWave Aug 19 '13 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ @TildalWave Yep, the downvoting idea is not perfect here .... Besides, is not a satellite defined as a body with a significantly (orders of magnitude) smaller mass than the object, which it is orbiting? Then, it is a special case of a two-body problem. Besides, orbital mechanics involve at least two mass bodies ... $\endgroup$ – s-m-e Aug 19 '13 at 18:41
  • $\begingroup$ Another good point (actually two) LOL... but I still think the "satellite" tag is unnecessary. But it doesn't matter, let's see what others think of it also. We're a democracy, which by itself implies "no or limited responsibility of an individual". We've already been responsible enough to provide the two opposing sides, all others have to do is click a few times with their mouse. ;) $\endgroup$ – TildalWave Aug 19 '13 at 18:49

You must log in to answer this question.

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