If this proposal is successful I hope that it can replace the currently existing electrical engineering Stack Exchange site and also encompass the subject matter that would fall under the scope of the existing mechanical engineering proposal.

If it is not to replace the existing electrical engineering site, then it would have to be more specific as to which field of engineering it relates to. But in my opinion the Stack Exchange sites and proposals are starting to get a bit too specific and are better served such as this proposal within a broader scope.

Proposal: Engineering

  • 2
    While there are many principles in common to several engineering disciplines, I think it's important to have a different area for each. For example, Chemical Engineering is a discipline completely different from Electrical.
    – tralston
    Sep 7, 2014 at 1:37
  • 1
    @tralston Battery technology is an example of an intersection between those disciplines. There are tons of engineering problems that can't be neatly sorted into this or that area. You are welcome to give your support to other proposals but it will probably be more effective to start by working together, and spin off other sites as the need arises.
    – Air
    Sep 8, 2014 at 17:07
  • 1
    @AirThomas You're right. I guess I wrote my comment thinking that there would only ever be just one site for engineering. I do think there needs to be a catch-all site for stuff that doesn't fit other kinds, or that fits multiple. I hope though that this combined strategy won't be the mindset forever. As a Chemical Engineer myself, I don't think EE.SE wants me cluttering up their QA with all sorts of ChE questions (apart from battery technology). Some day, I hope there's enough to spin off its own site!
    – tralston
    Sep 8, 2014 at 20:32

1 Answer 1


There's no reason to expect that any proposal should ever replace an existing launched, healthy network site. EE.SE has a proven user base and track record to justify its continued existence, plus it covers some topical areas that wouldn't belong on a general Engineering site.

There's also no reason to require that we reduce the scope of this proposal to "get out of the way" of EE.SE. Overlap between sites is not a problem if they can coexist productively, as is the case with many launched sites including the trinity of SO, SU and SE. This is something we discussed a fair amount on the Data Science beta site, in the context of overlap with Stats.SE. Two sites can approach the same question very differently and bring different perspectives; this benefits the user who's looking for one or the other of those approaches or perspectives.

If the Engineering proposal has a successful beta period and does end up being launched as a network site, it'll only be after a lot more discussion about scope and overlap. EE.SE may end up slightly changing their scope in response to our existence, if they feel it's to their benefit and the benefit of the users. But the context of actual questions and answers in an Engineering private beta is critical for informing those discussions.

In other words, let's see how it goes; you can continue to influence this discussion and argue your position by committing to the proposal and participating in our private beta main and meta sites.

  • you wrote: "EE.SE ... covers some topical areas that wouldn't belong on a general Engineering site." Can you post some examples, please? My gut tells me that anything on there would work on Engineering.SE
    – Qsigma
    Jan 9, 2015 at 14:44
  • The [soldering] tag has many good examples
    – Air
    Jan 9, 2015 at 15:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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