# Scope of orbital tag

The tag wiki is currently quite a disaster. I hope you will agree if you read it. Just a few (of the many) complaints that I have:

• No reference to wavefunctions, which is precisely what an orbital is!
• Implication that filling all orbitals is stable, in which case everything should really have infinite electrons so that it can fill its infinite orbitals.
• "Energy state" instead of "principal quantum number"
• Bohr model terminology: "volume within which the electron can stably orbit the nucleus"
• 90% probability is an arbitrary definition, not arising from Heisenberg uncertainty principle
• Implication that the angular momentum quantum number is $l = 1$ for an s-orbital

I plan on rewriting it some time soonTM (the exact time depends on how motivated I am). However, I do want to make sure I capture the scope of this tag correctly.

Since we already have , can I assume that only refers to atomic orbitals? The existing tag wiki strongly suggests this, but I am hesitant to do this, because one of the top questions is about Kohn-Sham orbitals, which are obviously not atomic orbitals, but do not quite belong under either.

If not, what should the exact scope be described as?

• I would think that having KS orbitals under orbitals is fine as long as the quantum-chemistry and/or dft tags are present. Sep 19 '16 at 21:38
• I agree, the tag is a mess, maybe at one time a well intended one, but still a mess. As far as I can see it was never intended to be very specific. It's just a bucket for anything that deals with orbitals. Be it their description, or be it referring to atomic orbitals, it is used for molecular orbital theory, valence bond theory, and DFT. Sep 20 '16 at 8:38
• That is going to be somewhat harder to write. I will try. :)
– orthocresol Mod
Sep 20 '16 at 13:25

## 1 Answer

I have done a basic rewrite, see the info page.

The detailed suggested edits of tag wiki is accessible at https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/42712 and that of the tag wiki excerpt is at https://chemistry.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/42713.

All comments are welcome. :)