BUR #10744 has been rejected.
create alias rifle_on_back -> rifle
Obviously any image in which you can see a rifle on someone's back contains a rifle.
Updated by nonamethanks
Posted under Tags
This topic has been locked.
BUR #10744 has been rejected.
create alias rifle_on_back -> rifle
Obviously any image in which you can see a rifle on someone's back contains a rifle.
Updated by nonamethanks
NWF_Renim said:
Is there a particular reason the tag is specifically for rifles? I wouldn't think there would be that much of a visual difference between having a rifle strapped to the back and having say a shotgun strapped to the back instead.
The tag should probably be handled the same way sword_on_back is, which is aliased to weapon_on_back, then tagged with the specific weapon.
Zumzigzoo said:
The tag should probably be handled the same way sword_on_back is, which is aliased to weapon_on_back, then tagged with the specific weapon.
Agreed.
That alias was in fact proposed four years ago but for some reason only sword_on_back got aliased. Might as well do the same for rifles. If not for consistency's sake, then because as already stated, the tag unnecessarily excludes long guns that aren't rifles.
BUR #10764 has been rejected.
create implication rifle_on_back -> rifle
Mexiguy said:
You probably meant an implication, not an alias
Yeah my bad
nonamethanks said:
BUR #11096 has been rejected.
create alias rifle_on_back -> weapon_on_back
As above.
…which, again, should be an implication. Not an alias. After all, why should images with sword on back, be tagged as rifle on back?
BUR #11425 has been rejected.
remove alias sword_on_back -> weapon_on_back
create implication sword_on_back -> weapon_on_back
create implication rifle_on_back -> weapon_on_back
If there is a rifle or sword on back, then that means there is a weapon on back
…but weapon on back, doesn't mean that there is a specific weapon on back.
We are constantly trying to find a balance between searchability and tag bloat. We could make tags like yellow_tail_ribbon and heavy_main_battle_tank but when all of these have all of their implication posts get a lot of superfluous tags (yellow ribbon + tail ribbon→ ribbon) (tank: motor vehicle→ ground vehicle + military vehicle→ military). Makes gardening mistakes a real hassle ( ಠ ʖ̯ ಠ).
So the question is do we want rifle on back as a tag or is weapon on back + rifle enough? Regardless the implication should be approved so that all posts with rifle on back gets the rifle tag.
zarlan said:
…which, again, should be an implication. Not an alias. After all, why should images with sword on back, be tagged as rifle on back?
No, it's an alias intentionally. If sword_on_back is aliased then rifle_on_back should be as well. It's worth noting there are 340 posts under weapon_on_back rifle -rifle_on_back (compared to rifle on back at 200).
Also if we do decide to dealias sword on back it would also have to implicate sword.
Talulah said:
No, it's an alias intentionally.
Why?
Also if we do decide to dealias sword on back it would also have to implicate sword.
Of course.
zarlan said:
I've read the whole thread, and no. No they don't. In no way, shape, or form, does anyone even venture to attempt, to explain it.
Zumzigzoo said:
The tag should probably be handled the same way sword_on_back is, which is aliased to weapon_on_back, then tagged with the specific weapon.
nonamethanks said:
BUR #11096 has been rejected.
create alias rifle_on_back -> weapon_on_back
As above.
The bulk update request #10744 (forum #214647) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
Talulah said:
[quotes]
You cite a claim, and a BUR…
Nowhere in that, is there anything that comes close to any kind of an explanation.
Also, I just told you, that I've read everything in the thread, so…
Citing something that obviously didn't explain things, is hardly going to help to explain.