TheGreatWolfgang said:
We are not here to force our opinions on one another, but rather to discuss which method is better for general tagging on the site.

That's a weird way of framing it...I really don't know how I would "force" my opinion on anyone through a forum where we are literally users of equal status and I have no control over you. I'm not forcing anything, merely defending my stance.

TheGreatWolfgang said:
I appreciate that you have helped the site in clearing out some of the disambiguation tags and I will personally look over the new heart_(disambiguation) if it becomes a thing.

I haven't done shit, in fact I'm surprised I even have 1,000 tag edits, but I don't advocate for useless disambiguations either. Also, nice to volunteer, but it still doesn't matter because this is the internet and if you ever decide to dip out and never come back we'd still be living with the legacy of your horrible disambiguation with no one around to actively tackle it.

AnotherDay said:
Your entire point of "it not being good enough to have its own tag because numbers"

That's not what I said at all. heart_(organ) already has its own tag...the tag is heart_(organ) (fancy that). Never have I advocated folding that tag into heart.

That said if we miss a few of them because <3 becomes heart I don't really care...we miss a few of them with <3 as I've shown.