Aliasing bleeding → blood
Link to alias

Reason:

One really doesn't function a whole lot differently than the other.

Another option would be to implicate instead, but I don't think it would be worth the effort.

Well bleeding could mean that there are visible wounds leaking blood, where blood just states the presence of gore.

VinylSparkledash said:
Well bleeding could mean that there are visible wounds leaking blood, where blood just states the presence of gore.

Yeah. Go for an implication, sure, but even that can be iffy. I mean, what if it's a robot that's bleeding? Is it still blood?

Furrin_Gok said:
Yeah. Go for an implication, sure, but even that can be iffy. I mean, what if it's a robot that's bleeding? Is it still blood?

Is it really "Bleeding" if it's not blood though?

VinylSparkledash said:
Well bleeding could mean that there are visible wounds leaking blood, where blood just states the presence of gore.

Well if there's wounds, then those are tagged separately with wounded. So we don't need bleeding for that. gore is also tagged separately.

----

As for the robot example: if it still acts like blood (even if it's a funny color), it often still gets tagged with blood. There's a few alien species with funny colored blood, but they still get the tag. So...unless the robot is clearly just leaking oil, sometimes the blood tag might belong as long as it seems enough like a living thing that's bleeding and not a machine that's leaking. But it would very much depend on what's the most reasonable interpretation for how it looks in that image, on a case-by-case basis. For instance, androids which are especially life-like are more likely to be considered bleeding while wall-e would probably be just leaking.

Furrin_Gok said:
Yeah. Go for an implication, sure, but even that can be iffy. I mean, what if it's a robot that's bleeding? Is it still blood?

If its oil, that could be tagged as leaking.

It's gonna be a pain in the ass to tag internal bleeding of oil.

bleeding should implicate blood, but aliasng is too strong

I know I'm a bit late, but...

glowing_eyes said:
...blood just states the presence of gore.

Not really. You can have gore without blood.

Circeus said:
bleeding should implicate blood, but aliasng is too strong

This. There are many images with blood in it that don't contain bleeding.

In general, actions and substances shouldn't be aliased together, even if the action always involves the substance. Implicate when valid but never alias.

BlueDingo said:
I know I'm a bit late, but...

Not really. You can have gore without blood.

This. There are many images with blood in it that don't contain bleeding.

In general, actions and substances shouldn't be aliased together, even if the action always involves the substance. Implicate when valid but never alias.

You are really too late, the alias is already made...

Siral_Exan said:
You are really too late, the alias is already made...

I know. I figured that out when I tried to tag bleeding to an image that contained bleeding. The alias can still be changed to an implication.

BlueDingo said:
I know. I figured that out when I tried to tag bleeding to an image that contained bleeding. The alias can still be changed to an implication.

It'd take a while to fix that (I assume), but why not make an "implication" request instead?

Siral_Exan said:
It'd take a while to fix that (I assume), but why not make an "implication" request instead?

Is it possible to make a bleeding I-> blood request when bleeding A-> blood already exists? I don't think the system is going to allow the possibility of a situation where tag1 can be both implicated and aliased to tag2.

BlueDingo said:
Is it possible to make a bleeding I-> blood request when bleeding A-> blood already exists? I don't think the system is going to allow the possibility of a situation where tag1 can be both implicated and aliased to tag2.

No, you'd need to unalias it first, hence the quotation marks over implication. Make a tag alias/implication thread without using either options, and title it "unalias bleeding -> blood; imply bleeding -> blood. Cite the alias thread (this one) in the thread you make, and do the header stuff you normally see in the aliases and implications threads you see.

Of note, you won't be able to make a link to the alias/implications page itself, so I suggest source to alias bleeding -> blood in its place.

kinda ironic that this was approved when bleeding could stand for any kind of fluid escaping thru a wound on or in the body, yet the same people take issue with geographic bodies like rivers and oceans that most commonly are associated with bodies of water being implicated to water>>...