Posted under Tags
BUR #2340 has been rejected.
create implication long_sword -> sword
Reason: Short sword and two-hande sword etc. are all implied to the tag sword.
EDIT: This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.
EDIT: This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.
EDIT: The bulk update request #2340 (forum #163837) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
Updated by DanbooruBot
There is no existing longsword -> sword implication to remove. The creator of the longsword wiki used DText to make it look like an implication exists when there is none. Note that "Sword" is capitalized and the hotlinks don't actually go anywhere.
@evazion Maybe the implication and alias notes on wiki pages should be formatted in a way that can't be replicated by DText, to prevent this sort of fakery.
iridescent_slime said:
There is no existing longsword -> sword implication to remove. The creator of the longsword wiki used DText to make it look like an implication exists when there is none. Note that "Sword" is capitalized and the hotlinks don't actually go anywhere.
Oh, I didn´t notice that. Then we only need to discuss, if long sword should imply sword, as short sword implies it and two-handed sword too.
I find it hard to disagree that all images tagged long_sword should also be tagged sword, barring all the obviously mistagged ones like post #2919455 and post #3567355. But my feelings regarding this tag are much the same now as in topic #12590. Long_sword, like the other tags for particular types of swords, is used so indiscriminately that it isn't a useful tag. Its description tells us that it is a European sword with a cruciform hilt, which seems simple enough, but the tag is packed with Eastern swords and fantasy weapons.
Tags like long_sword (and broadsword, and claymore_(sword), and zweihander) exist presumably because there are users here who are interested in historical weapons and want to be able to search for specific types of swords. But it seems like none of the people knowledgeable about these swords is interested in actually cleaning up and maintaining the tags.
Long sword is fine to me, except I think it should be called longsword to make it clear that it's for European longswords. The tag could use some gardening, but as long as people don't spam it on every sword with a long blade, I can live with it.
evazion said:
Long sword is fine to me, except I think it should be called longsword to make it clear that it's for European longswords. The tag could use some gardening, but as long as people don't spam it on every sword with a long blade, I can live with it.
I gardened it a bit, so most of the images should fit the wiki now.
But now I see, that this tag is alot of work, because if excalibur fits the description, we need to add the tag for over 100 pages. I can do that, if everyone is fine with it, but now I rather discuss if we really need this tag? I´m okay with keeping it, but I don´t know if I could maintain it all the time and as we see, most users aren´t really willing to do it.
The bulk update request #2340 (forum #163837) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
