# Should we remove [transcendental-numbers]?

We have a tag .

It's currently used on only 2 questions, here and here. Both are and involve approximating 2 transcendental numbers. (e and the Fransén-Robinson constant)

This doesn't appear really to add anything to these challenges, 1 is also tagged math and number and the other is tagged calculus. Can we burninate it?

Optionally, we can create an tag for challenges that involve approximating constants. (not sure if this is a good idea, might be too uncommon)

## Update:

I've gone ahead and created a tag (and tag wiki) for . I also retagged the 2 current [transcendental-numbers] questions with approximation (and removed the old tag). I'll hold off on retagging the questions listed in @Flip's answer for a bit.

• 'Burninate' is an interesting word. Jan 6, 2017 at 0:28
• @Pavel It's the commonly used word for deleting tags. Jan 6, 2017 at 16:26
• @Easterly Irk The tag may seem to uncommon, but we have a few approximation challenges ready to be retagged. Jan 6, 2017 at 16:27

# We should burninate it, replacing it with a broader [approximation].

Edit: This tag has been created. Questions on this last have been retagged. Other questions that find into this category can be slowly retagged when stumbled across.

The two challenges tagged with are both about approximating mathematical constant - if we burninate this tag, we can replace it with .

Challenges that would fit under this tag include:

... and many more.

# Yes, we should burninate it.

• It's only used on 2 questions

• Very few numbers are proven transcendental, and it's unlikely a challenge would be to prove a number transcendental

• All of the existing challenges (all 2 of them) don't particularly relate to the actual transcendental-ness of the numbers (i.e. the infinite, nonrepeating part) and are basically just evaluate a formula to a certain precision

# No, we shouldn't burninate it

• The tag is relevant to all questions about transcendental numbers, not just proving them
• It may be used on more questions as time goes on
• There is no point to destroying it
• This doesn't really present any arguments for keeping it, other than the second one. The first should probably be a comment on my answer, and the last one is either wrong or pointless. The "point" is to clean up unnecessary tags. Jan 6, 2017 at 1:07