Bickering is more of a verbal argument between characters, given a lot of these posts involve physical hitting, pushing, pinching, etc I think it is the wrong word to use.
Posted under Tags
NWF_Renim said:
Bickering is more of a verbal argument between characters, given a lot of these posts involve physical hitting, pushing, pinching, etc I think it is the wrong word to use.
It's the one we found most fitting.
There's also banter I guess? I can edit it to be any word that fits other than fighting.
Admiral_Pectoral said:
It's the one we found most fitting.
There's also banter I guess? I can edit it to be any word that fits other than fighting.
It runs into the same issues of bickering, actually it’s worse since it lacks the conflict meaning. If you want a subtag for only depictions of verbal fighting and yelling at each other bickering is fine, but I disagree with trying to alias fighting to those terms.
NWF_Renim said:
It runs into the same issues of bickering, actually it’s worse since it lacks the conflict meaning. If you want a subtag for only depictions of verbal fighting and yelling at each other bickering is fine, but I disagree with trying to alias fighting to those terms.
I just want to potentially find a solution for this ambiguous tag name.
You cannot know what it should be used for without referring to the wiki and that's a sign of a bad tag name IMO.
I initially had an idea of having a fighting_(serious) type of alias for battle, but it doesn't sound or look great. But the idea is there.
Admiral_Pectoral said:
I just want to potentially find a solution for this ambiguous tag name.
You cannot know what it should be used for without referring to the wiki and that's a sign of a bad tag name IMO.I initially had an idea of having a fighting_(serious) type of alias for battle, but it doesn't sound or look great. But the idea is there.
It’d make more sense making fighting a parent tag and making subtags for the different kinds of fighting under it.
We could broadly define fighting as a conflict between two opposing characters or sides, whether physical or verbal.
Subtags could be like
If we want to subsume battle into this would could add that to the tag as well, and/or add additional subtags
These are all just brainstorming ideas, so don’t take the naming or definitions as concrete.
Updated
I do appreciate you taking the time to distinguish them like that... But it just seems like a lot of subtags for me. It would cause more confusion than anything. I don't think anyone will think of the dictionary definitions for these words when tagging, and I don't think we need that many distinctions.
It would not solve the issue of needing to go to the wiki to understand what to use, which is what I'm trying to solve here.
If possible. I would like it to remain two tags and make them as foolproof as possible.
I agree fighting is a bit ambiguous if it's only supposed to be used for small scale altercations, but battle is perfectly fine for its intended use. Battle automatically carries a serious tone, you wouldn't use it to describe someone arguing (unless you were being facetious). I don't think it really needs an alias.
NWF_Renim said:
We could broadly define fighting as a conflict between two opposing characters or sides, whether physical or verbal.
Subtags could be like
- Argument - Characters verbally yelling/arguing at each other
- Quarrel - Characters yelling and physically pinching, grabbing, and/or pushing each other
- Scuffle - Characters angry and hitting each other, may be depicted comically with a dust cloud
If we want to subsume battle into this would could add that to the tag as well, and/or add additional subtags
- Battle - Characters or forces fighting to commit physical and potential lethal force upon each other
- Engagement (battle) - A battle between two military forces
These are all just brainstorming ideas, so don’t take the naming or definitions as concrete.
I think all of these are pretty good ideas. I don't know if we need so many individual tags for different kinds of conflicts, but name-wise the suggestions sound good to me.
NWF_Renim said:
We could broadly define fighting as a conflict between two opposing characters or sides, whether physical or verbal.
I think fighting as a parent tag for any kind of fighting sounds good, or better as how we use this tag at the moment.
I´m not a friend of the amount of proposed tags and would say that it´s better to have one tag for (serious) arguments, while having one tag for physical battles.
It would resolve the issue in that fighting is define broadly as a parent tag and in short never wrong. The subtags (tags that implicate fighting) then would allow for people to further classify the type of fighting going on, which would at least let those looking for something more specific. In short think of the fighting tag essentially becoming like the shirt tag, it covers any kind of shirt-like tops, and tags like battle and these others becoming like blue_shirt, red_shirt, etc in relationship to the fighting tag.
Admiral_Pectoral said:
It would not solve the issue of needing to go to the wiki to understand what to use, which is what I'm trying to solve here.
If possible. I would like it to remain two tags and make them as foolproof as possible.
That's just not always possible. No tag can ever be foolproof, that's why we have the wikis.
But my stance at this point would be to use fighting as a parent tag for conflicts, use quarrel for minor/nonserious conflicts, since a quarrel can be both verbal and physical, and use battle for serious combat situations. We also have duel by the way, which is a subset of battle.
blindVigil said:
I agree fighting is a bit ambiguous if it's only supposed to be used for small scale altercations, but battle is perfectly fine for its intended use. Battle automatically carries a serious tone, you wouldn't use it to describe someone arguing (unless you were being facetious). I don't think it really needs an alias.
What prevents people from tagging battle uploads with just fighting? That was my line of thought and what lead me to make a thread about it in the first place. Just look at the uploads under fighting. The most recent pages are all filled with serious fights. Which is what made me think we shouldn't have it as a tag.
That's just not always possible. No tag can ever be foolproof, that's why we have the wikis.
But my stance at this point would be to use fighting as a parent tag for conflicts, use quarrel for minor/nonserious conflicts, since a quarrel can be both verbal and physical, and use battle for serious combat situations. We also have duel by the way, which is a subset of battle.
I do know that. But realistically no one is going to check every wiki they use so we should try to rely less on them (especially in cases of general tags like this).
Anyway, I do like this suggestion. So the solution is as follows:
After rereading Renim's explanation I'm feeling OK about this.
What does everyone else think?
Updated
Admiral_Pectoral said:
What prevents people from tagging battle uploads with just fighting? That was my line of thought and what lead me to make a thread about it in the first place. Just look at the uploads under fighting. The most recent pages are all filled with serious fights. Which is what made me think we shouldn't have it as a tag.
I meant battle doesn't need an alias, but agreed that fighting does need something done for it, because "fighting" doesn't carry any special connotations and is often used as a general term for conflicts of varying intensity. The fact people are using fighting in place of battle, and not the other way around, is proof of that.
The bulk update request #4172 (forum #177291) has been rejected by @Admiral_Pectoral.
BUR #4614 has been rejected.
create implication quarrel -> fighting
create implication battle -> fighting
create implication duel -> battle
Parent tag for all kind of conflict will be fighting so that it's always correct. You can further describe the situation with the other tags.
Please mention any other tag that could use the implication and I'll add it.
Is there any alias we could have for quarrel? I feel like it's not always the first word one might think of, so maybe that could help users to find it easier.