Posted under Tags
BUR #16113 has been rejected.
create implication glock_17 -> glock
create implication glock_18c -> glock
create implication glock_18c -> machine_pistol
create implication glock_19 -> glock
They are all Glock models, 18C is the full-auto one. Unfortunately the implication does not work like how *_(cosplay) implicates cosplay. The rest of models have too insufficient amount of posts.
Updated
I see no point in having umbrella tag like these for guns. Even something like kalashnikov rifle was a mistake imo.
Collective said:
Are the model tags really necessary? I don't see how it can be useful, but I'm not into guns.
Thank you for your questions and opinions. I think it's as necessary as specific outfit-related tags (e.g. Kamiyama high school uniform (Project Sekai)) or character names. It's all about images' visual components.
nonamethanks said:
I see no point in having umbrella tag like these for guns. Even something like Kalashnikov rifle was a mistake imo.
Now I can figure why weapon-related BURs are getting far tougher time into approval. Sorry, I don't think so. Kalashnikov rifle tags is still useful to be applicable for unidentified AKs. This is still useful in order to prevent less-informed users from simply tagging any AK as AK-47 without looking closer to its appearance. As a rule of thumb, if a user sees something that looks like an AK-47 on an image but not sure if it's actually the AK-47 or not, just use Kalashnikov rifle. Then other users will edit the post by adding specified tag.
But I still cannot figure out why would some strongly disagree with some simple implications (no complex spoilers or plot involved). Strongly disagree by downvoting without Please see also topic #23647 and topic #23634. It's still have a point, just like why we got shirt despite there are a lot specific shirt colours.
IMHO weapon-related implications seem to be simpler than series or character ones. Glock -> handgun is as self-explanatory as how red shirt implies shirt.
Updated
World_Funeral said:
Thank you for your questions and opinions. I think it's as necessary as specific outfit-related tags (e.g. Kamiyama high school uniform (Project Sekai)) or character names. It's all about images' visual components.
Now I can figure why weapon-related BURs are getting far tougher time into approval. Sorry, I don't think so. Kalashnikov rifle tags is still useful to be applicable for unidentified AKs. This is still useful in order to prevent less-informed users from simply tagging any AK as AK-47 without looking closer to its appearance. As a rule of thumb, if a user sees something that looks like an AK-47 on an image but not sure if it's actually the AK-47 or not, just use Kalashnikov rifle. Then other users will edit the post by adding specified tag.
But I still cannot figure out why would some strongly disagree with some simple implications (no complex spoilers or plot involved). Strongly disagree by downvoting without Please see also topic #23647 and topic #23634. It's still have a point, just like why we got shirt despite there are a lot specific shirt colours.
IMHO weapon-related implications seem to be simpler than series or character ones. Glock -> handgun is as self-explanatory as how red shirt implies shirt.
Literally the only visible difference between the Glock 17 and the 19 is that it's that the 17 is half an inch smaller, how the hell are you supposed to be able to tell that when tagging.
evazion was against these types of implications as well, so I'm not sure why they got approved in the first place. The other problem is that there is a minimum post count for implications, so even for kalashnikov rifle we have a bunch of sub-tags that don't implicate the main tag. It makes these implication trees kind of pointless.
World_Funeral said:
As a rule of thumb, if a user sees something that looks like an AK-47 on an image but not sure if it's actually the AK-47 or not, just use Kalashnikov rifle. Then other users will edit the post by adding specified tag.
That would be great if that's how it worked. People see something that looks like an AK-47 so it gets tagged AK-47. Whether or not it is isn't relevant because most people don't know the difference between the dozen or more different tags we have for these same-looking weapons and people aren't going to think of some "Kalashnikov request" type of tag.
But I still cannot figure out why would some strongly disagree with some simple implications (no complex spoilers or plot involved). Strongly disagree by downvoting without Please see also topic #23647 and topic #23634. It's still have a point, just like why we got shirt despite there are a lot specific shirt colours.
IMHO weapon-related implications seem to be simpler than series or character ones. Glock -> handgun is as self-explanatory as how red shirt implies shirt.
The disagreement comes from the fact that weapon tagging is a clusterfuck of nested tags and deep implication chains that nobody who isn't a gun nut (read: the average tagger) will be able to follow. It's not "I don't think glock 17 should implicate glock", it's "I don't think we need all these tags".
Mexiguy said:
Literally the only visible difference between the Glock 17 and the 19 is that it's that the 17 is half an inch smaller, how the hell are you supposed to be able to tell that when tagging.
In context of illustrations, size difference between weapon models seem to be insignificant details and remained distinguishable. So it will be fine if you would rather request alias for all Glock model tags into a single Glock. I'm OK with it because it's still accurately descriptive without causing tag clutter.
It was not me who created those tags as well.
This is completely different from aliasing all AK models like the AKM and AK-74 into a single Kalashnikov rifle. There are indeed visually distinctive details between all AK models.
Glad that you could prove if I'm mistaken via downvoting my BURs despite others are being underlooked, thank you. Or if you think machine pistol is a borderline tag that overlaps with handgun and submachine gun - thus it should not be used. To be honest, I will refrain from simultaneously clicking downvote against others' BURs if not feeling like strongly disagreeing with them (use meh instead).
Talulah said:
evazion was against these types of implications as well, so I'm not sure why they got approved in the first place. The other problem is that there is a minimum post count for implications, so even for Kalashnikov rifle we have a bunch of sub-tags that don't implicate the main tag. It makes these implication trees kind of pointless.
I think it's unfortunate, despite no matter how accurate implication BUR is. The point of implication is in order to make tagging easier and faster. If Kalashnikov rifle only implicates rifle, it's still correct. As not all Kalashnikov-pattern rifles are assault rifles. For instance, PSL Romak and Tabuk are AK-based semi-auto DMRs.
Talulah said:
That would be great if that's how it worked. People see something that looks like an AK-47 so it gets tagged AK-47. Whether or not it is isn't relevant because most people don't know the difference between the dozen or more different tags we have for these same-looking weapons and people aren't going to think of some "Kalashnikov request" type of tag.The disagreement comes from the fact that weapon tagging is a clusterf**k of nested tags and deep implication chains that nobody who isn't a gun nut (read: the average tagger) will be able to follow. It's not "I don't think Glock 17 should implicate Glock", it's "I don't think we need all these tags".
Kalashnikov request is still not a necessary metatag. Putting weapon request along with actually existing weapon name a user added into a post can indicate that the user still not sure what type it is. Another reason why the site community is willing to cooperate and work together for good through tag gardening.
Well, so weapon tagging can cause more implications than clothing tags. I won't say gun nuts, they are basically very knowledgeable (more than me) expert taggers.
it's "I don't think we need all these tags".
When it comes to more-calibre specific weapon name tags while the weapons show no distinctive visual characteristics, like the H&K UMP 9, 40 or 45 - I agree with your reasoning. Appreciated all of your thoughts here.
Updated
BUR #16147 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
create alias glock_17 -> glock
create alias glock_19 -> glock
create alias glock_18c -> glock
Mexiguy said:
Literally the only visible difference between the Glock 17 and the 19 is that it's that the 17 is half an inch smaller, how the hell are you supposed to be able to tell that when tagging.
I came up with an alternate BUR idea if most of you strongly disagreed with the former (so sorry for that). In case you prefer to use a single tag. It's still technically accurate to call all Glock models as Glock, because the only differentiating factor is size and calibre while they all look identical. Those differences remained visually significant in context of illustrations.
The rest of models have are so undertagged (3 or less) and can be nuked manually if necessary, even when the illustration describes the specific Glock model. (e.g. post #2494250).
Updated
The bulk update request #16113 (forum #237884) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
The bulk update request #16147 (forum #238062) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
BUR #20407 has been rejected.
mass update glock_17 -> -glock_17 glock
mass update glock_18c -> -glock_18c glock
mass update glock_40 -> -glock_40 glock
mass update glock_19 -> -glock_19 glock
mass update glock_26 -> -glock_26 glock
The previous implication BUR here were failed, and my former mistake of being obsessed with technicality was to blame.
The second idea of aliasing the more specific tags (forum #238062) into more generally-recognized Glock was automatically rejected. Here is the alternative. I am open to what will the admins think about this issue.
There are no contrasting, visually distinct cues between each models, regardless of specific name, size comparison and calibre. Let's stick to the basic, general tag for all Glock models. This cannot be simple nuking attempt because there are random posts with Glock_* that lacks the main Glock tag.
Updated
The bulk update request #16147 (forum #238062) has been approved by @nonamethanks.
The bulk update request #20407 (forum #256679) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.
