thefreedictionary.com has the following usage note under 'phenomenon':

Usage Note: Phenomenon is the only singular form of this noun; phenomena is the usual plural. Phenomenons may also be used as the plural in nonscientific writing when the meaning is "extraordinary things, occurrences, or persons": They were phenomenons in the history of music.

Perhaps then the tag 'phenomenons' should be renamed to 'phenomena'? I couldn't find a way to do that myself, I can only edit the wiki, not the tag name.


Pure dreck, chosen because

  1. the author didn't know the term for the subject they want to talk about or
  2. an abominable big-list question that is a poster boy for why those things should be killed with fire on sight.

If no one argues, I will remove the tag and close the list. Now that it has Terry's extensive answer I suppose I shouldn't delete it, but...

Done. In a couple of days the tag will disappear from the list of tags used by the auto-completion system, and hopefully that will be that. If we want a actual ban we'd have to convince the team that it was needed.

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Please please please get rid of the tag. $\endgroup$ – user10851 Feb 27 '13 at 17:19
  • $\begingroup$ Agreed, I favor closing the question and removing the tag. $\endgroup$ – David Z Feb 27 '13 at 17:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't see how my question is 'an abominable big-list question'. First of all, I think that question will help the aspiring physicist and layman alike to help form an idea on how much the field of physics has progressed (to the point that there are few valid answers to the question). Also, the whole point of the question was that it is not a 'big-list', but a question with very few valid answers. Furthermore, the dozen or so votes speak for themselves. OT: I also noticed physics se uses 'phenomenons' instead of 'phenomena'. Didn't know there was an actual difference in meaning. $\endgroup$ – OmnipresentAbsence Feb 28 '13 at 10:55
  • $\begingroup$ @OmnipresentAbsence there may have been some creative embellishment ;-) but that is a very open-ended question, precisely the sort of thing that is not appropriate on this site. $\endgroup$ – David Z Mar 1 '13 at 8:59

You must log in to answer this question.

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