8
$\begingroup$

I came across a question about ionic radii. I was hesitant to apply the tag because the usage only indicates (no wiki either)

A measure of the size of its atoms, usually the mean or typical distance from the center of the nucleus to the boundary of the surrounding "cloud" of electrons.

This is pretty much no guidance at all. It is just the first line of the wikipedia article.

The atomic radius of a chemical element is a measure of the size of its atoms, usually the mean or typical distance from the center of the nucleus to the boundary of the surrounding cloud of electrons. Since the boundary is not a well-defined physical entity, there are various non-equivalent definitions of atomic radius. Three widely used definitions of atomic radius are: Van der Waals radius, ionic radius, and covalent radius.

Strictly speaking atoms are no ions. I don't understand why ionic-radius appears there.

Here is my proposal:

We rename the tag to just (keep the other as synonym) and hence include all instances of atomic or molecular entities. (Adjust the tag usage as necessary.)

The tag is used 32 times as of now, maybe there are a few more unused cases out there. I briefly considered creating , but I don't think it would gain enough traction in the long run and in a cleaning session would probably merge it with the former.

In any case, the tag-wiki has to be clarified.

I would like to hear your opinion about this proposal, maybe you have a better strategy.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I'm good with having one tag for all of them. Is it really necessary to make a distinction between atomic and ionic radii? I think not. $\endgroup$
    – M.A.R.
    Commented Feb 10, 2016 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ I like the one-size-fits-all radius you propose. Thanks for doing that. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 10, 2016 at 13:18
  • $\begingroup$ @IͶΔ can you do a MATT of radius for me? I’m horribly bad at MATT’s .__.'' $\endgroup$
    – Jan
    Commented Feb 13, 2016 at 17:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Jan MATT(radius)~14 same for atomic-radius though. $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 13, 2016 at 18:34

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .