Topic: Tag Implication: shrew -> mammal

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Implicating shrew → mammal
Link to implication

Reason:

We have 100+ content of the shrew itself, I'm surprised shrews haven't been implicated as mammal. I'm not implicating as rodent, as despite appearances they aren't rodents. and are actually more closer related to moles.

Regardless, this species needs a mammal implication.

Other species implications

Other species related aliases

Other species related implication changes/removals

  • Remove pallas's cat's implication to cat; it is a wildcat, not a domestic cat. Add feline implication instead.

There are many more tbh but... Might be better to start small and not go too overboard in one post.

Updated by Genjar

BlueDingo said:
Not all magpies are corvids.

post #371118 <- corvid / Not corvid -> post #512665

Perhaps we should change magpie to a disembag page? As true magpies ARE corvids, but a couple of species (such as the australian magpie you offered as an example, which is a passarine) are just called magpie in name only, but AREN'T magpie.

Eithere that or maybe state in the wikis of the non-corvid magpies that they aren't true magpis

Updated by anonymous

Siral_Exan said:
Sphynx are not cats, they are felines.

The Sphynx is a breed of hairless cat, the sphinx is a feline mythical creature. Name's very similar, ppl get really confused with it often

Updated by anonymous

facelessmess said:
The Sphynx is a breed of hairless cat, the sphinx is a feline mythical creature. Name's very similar, ppl get really confused with it often

It's archaic spelling, I hid it after the note saying to use the sphinx spelling. That is very confusing to have...

Updated by anonymous

Siral_Exan said:
It's archaic spelling, I hid it after the note saying to use the sphinx spelling. That is very confusing to have...

Hahaha don't worry about it, it trips me up too tbh, i often mix them up myself.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

Siral_Exan said:
A Tauren_(feral) is actually a feral form of a Tauren Druid. They are actually cats or bears.

It probably should be renamed (aliased?) to tauren_(feral_form), now that we have a standard for tagging those.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar said:
It probably should be renamed (aliased?) to tauren_(feral_form), now that we have a standard for tagging those.

Yes, it should. But not feral_form, bear_form & cat_form, leaving a total of 12 bloody species: Night_Elf + cat_form / bear_form; Tauren + cat_form / bear_form; Worgen + cat_form / bear_form; and a Warcraft-specific Troll tag + cat_form / bear form. All of these are suffixes.

The reason it's called feral is because the spec itself is called feral, while people adopted it for guardian druids (the ones that turn into bears). Effectively slant for the official form names, Cat Form and Bear Form. I pray that none of the other forms arise, almost all of them unique because of race.

ALTERNATIVELY[/b] , we could just use something like Warcraft_bear_form & etc., and skip all the formalities. My vote is honestly for this, just use Occam's Razor and make the shortest and simplest tags.

Updated by anonymous

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

implications:
Aliases:
Un-implications:

+1.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

implications:

Aready suggested, respectively at:

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

implications:

-1. For the reasons already stated by BlueDingo.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Perhaps we should change magpie to a disembag page? As true magpies ARE corvids, but a couple of species (such as the australian magpie you offered as an example, which is a passarine) are just called magpie in name only, but AREN'T magpie.

Eithere that or maybe state in the wikis of the non-corvid magpies that they aren't true magpis

They are magapies. What happens is the fact that 'magapie' is just a common name that doesn't truly reflect taxonomy.
I am in favor of disambiguating.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

implications:

'mastiff' is a name used for some distinct races, so it need to be either sorted or disambiguated.

Currently in under the 'mastiff' tag we have:

Note: some of those are currently untagged.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

implications:

-1. 'snake_humanoid' is used pretty much in the same way as 'lamia', hence it should aliased to it.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

Aliases:

-1. The mere fact of they being words found within the name of some species don't justify an alias, unless there are enough precedents of this wrong usage.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

Aliases:

-1. Not common at all, quite the opposite.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

Aliases:

Unsure about those.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

Aliases:

-1. Aliasing mythological creatures to common species like that is totally inacurrate (including the kitsune alias).

Saying that kitsune would be covered by 'fox + multi_tail' is the same as saying tag 'cerberus' would be covered by 'dog + 3_heads' or 'pegasus' would be covered by 'horse + wings + hybrid'.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:

There are many more tbh but... Might be better to start small and not go too overboard in one post.

Sincerely, this was a a bad idea.
Putting related suggestions in a same thread is ok; it allows suggest without creating a unnecessarily large number of threads, also allowing someone to search for certain subjects. But putting a bunch of totally unrelated species suggestions in a same thread is way closer to a mess than anything else.

-/-/-

I suggest the following implications:

Updated by anonymous

O16 said:
Sincerely, this was a a bad idea.
Putting related suggestions in a same thread is ok; it allows suggest without creating a unnecessarily large number of threads, also allowing someone to search for certain subjects. But putting bunch of totally unrelated species suggestions in a same thread is way closer to a mess than anything else.

My apologies, I thought them being species related was related enough, but I suppose I was wrong. My bad

Agreed with your implications.

Also: do you think we should suggest the unalias of kitsune to fox? I mostly suggested the nine tailed fox to fox alias because of this certain alias, but perhaps suggesting an unalias and rather having both kitsune and nine tailed fox IMPLICATED to fox could be better.

Updated by anonymous

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
My apologies, I thought them being species related was related enough, but I suppose I was wrong. My bad

Everyone commits gattes time to time.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Also: do you think we should suggest the unalias of kitsune to fox? I mostly suggested the nine tailed fox to fox alias because of this certain alias, but perhaps suggesting an unalias and rather having both kitsune and nine tailed fox IMPLICATED to fox could be better.

Yes, that would be a lot better.

Edit: actually, aliasing 'nine_tailed_fox' to 'kitsune', then imply this second to 'fox', makes more sense, but the unalias part is still good.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Also: do you think we should suggest the unalias of kitsune to fox?

Over my dead body. That was one of the worst tagging messes in the history of the site. Way too many conflicting ideas about what exactly is a 'kitsune'. Use fox japanese_mythology instead.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar said:
Over my dead body. That was one of the worst tagging messes in the history of the site. Way too many conflicting ideas about what exactly is a 'kitsune'. Use fox japanese_mythology instead.

Thinking better, 'kitsune' literally means 'fox' in japanese, what give a reason for this alias; however the fact o 'kitsune' being aliases to 'fox' does not justify aliasing other more specific terms like 'kyuubi' or 'nine_tailed_fox'. We should at least have a name for this creature, instead of using a combination of tags.

Edit: if we can stipulate when tags like 'taur' should or shouldn't be used, why can't we do the same to 'kyuubi' (or whatever is name)?

Updated by anonymous

BlueDingo said:
In other words, how it is now.

*facepalm*

Sorry, I forgot to verify.

BlueDingo said:
Would it be worth making a passerine tag?

*search*

I guess not, but my assurance level isn't so high, since my knowledge about avian taxonomy is more limited than I would like.
According on my search: unlike parrots or owls, the most easily recognisable characteristics of passerines are shared with some other orders; apparently there is no catch-all term for this "group" either.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

Yeah, passerine is so broad that it probably wouldn't be of much use. It covers at least half of the bird species, many of which would be tough to tag by twys.

As for other possible groups, maybe we should have a tag for hawks and eagles: accipitrids. Unfortunately that's quite a mouthful compared to something like 'corvid'.. Plus the tag would be dominated by falco_lombardi, so I'm not sure if it's a good idea.

Updated by anonymous

  • 1