Nuke military_truck

BUR #30899 has been rejected.

create alias military_truck -> truck

Retaliation to topic #24919. This seemed to be a pedantic "pet tag" first initiated by a single user that simply serve as an obvious tandem for two-keyword search military_vehicle truck. Get real and I am sure that vast majority of users do not care a lot about certain builders' pedantism.

Many military truck models in real life are basically commercial trucks simply painted olive drab/camouflage or just being equipped with certain armaments.

I think the issue with this is literally reflected in what you're saying "many military trucks" which means not all military trucks are just repainted civilian models. There do exist military trucks that are armored and have armored windows/view ports that are recognizable from base civilian models. Examples: post #7969903, post #4121207, post #5476943

I find myself ambivalent about this. GreyOmega is, of course, correct — and anyway there are purpose-designed military vehicles such as tank transporters post #8114721 or this Chugata in the background of post #8114933 which are far more easily searched-for with this tag than digging through truck would be.

However I am concerned with the mistagging potential here, post #5476943 that GreyOmega mentions, featuring a Casspir Mk6, illustrates it. The latter is certainly based upon a lorry (the Ural 4320), but a lorry itself is not. This was another example I came upon (recently rectified by Fenton 🙏). I think the issue may be that 'truck' is commonly used in a far broader sense than its specialised cargo/freight role entails, and, more importantly, that the Danbooru wiki expects. Is this cause to get rid of the tag, however? I would tend to lean lean towards 'probably not'.

Cpt_Skippy said:

I find myself ambivalent about this. GreyOmega is, of course, correct — and anyway there are purpose-designed military vehicles such as tank transporters post #8114721 or this Chugata in the background of post #8114933 which are far more easily searched-for with this tag than digging through truck would be.

However I am concerned with the mistagging potential here, post #5476943 that GreyOmega mentions, featuring a Casspir Mk6, illustrates it. The latter is certainly based upon a lorry (the Ural 4320), but a lorry itself is not. This was another example I came upon (recently rectified by Fenton 🙏). I think the issue may be that 'truck' is commonly used in a far broader sense than its specialised cargo/freight role entails, and, more importantly, that the Danbooru wiki expects. Is this cause to get rid of the tag, however? I would tend to lean lean towards 'probably not'.

I already moved some of the vehicles to the armored personnel carrier tag yesterday. Feel free to check if you could find anything wrong.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 45 days.

The bulk update request #30899 (forum #305148) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.