3
$\begingroup$

I think instead of simply having Organic Chemistry as a tag we should subdivide it into separate ones.

For beginners, the tags Aldol, Bayer-Villiger etc. could be used.

What do you think ?

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

I'm not so sure if we should have tags for specific reactions, however aldol is quite broad with wide applications (and thus a wide range of questions) so that one makes sense.

Creating tags for the subfields of OC seems like a better idea to me.

But we ought to only create tags if there are a large number of questions (or we can see that there will be a large number of questions) for that topic. Anything with 6-ish questions or more at this stage seems tag worthy to me.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Another alternative would be to tag by functional group. For example, the Baeyer-Villiger reaction converts ketones to esters, so those tags would be appropriate. Most introductory organic chemistry texts and courses organize reactions by functional groups.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

For beginners, the tags Aldol, Bayer-Villiger [...]

Why not tags for Bischler-Napieralski, Pictet-Spengler and Pommeranz-Fritsch then? ;)

Tags for name reactions are probably not the best idea ever - unless we'd like to end up with a tag list that looks like the combined phone books of Berlin and Tokyo ;)

Sub tags inspired by March's Advanced Organic Chemistry aren't an option either. I mean: Who will use Alkylidene-de-oxo-bisubstitution as a tag?

When subtagging according to the functional groups involved, which one is relevant for a transformation? Starting material, product(s), all of them?

Maybe we should just relax until the questions reach the 5,000 mark.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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