Should we sugest merges in some of the tags we have that are potential synonyms?

Question

I agree in most of the potential tag synonyms @bon sugested to merge in 2016.

My opinion:

• minerals and mineralogy It is anoying to enter both tags each time a mineral is related to the question. And we banned id-my-mineral questions.
• rocks. Same, I would merge with petrology
• fossils Same, I would merge with paleontology.
• climate Same, I would merge with climatology.
• crystals Same, I would merge with crystallography.
• ocean Same, I would merge with oceanography. (this is in the list to vote)
• tectonics and plate-tectonics are not the same.
• seismicand seismology are the same, but not the same as earthquakes
• glacier I wouldn't merge it with glaciollogy as glaciollogy is a science that covers more things than glaciers and the tag would be more specific for questions about glaciers around the world.
• glaciationand ice-age are the same if I am not wrong. Not sure the one should be used.
• mountain-building is an unnecesary tag, as it is orogeny the correct term, but mountains is usefull for questions about mountains and not his genesis.
• hidrologyand hidrogeologyare separated disciplines.
• petrography is used in microscope images and petrology is a more global science.
• Not sure for the others.

Most of these sugestions of merging are not in the synonym tags queue.

I have not the privilege to sugest merges and I am not sure if they were sugested and disaproved in 2016, but if not, should someone do it and we start to vote as bon's post has 5 upvotes?

The problem to do effective the merges is that to vote you need to reach 1,250 reputation points and: "...a total answer score (total upvotes minus total downvotes) of 5 or more on the tag". We have not people with both requisites and active in the site for all the merges enough to do the merges quickly, but in my opinion it would be nice the sugestions were in the queue to be merged progressivelly in the future if the community agree.