Aliasing flint → flint_(disambiguation)
Link to alias

Reason:

16 flint_(* tags. + flint_(artist) tag that aliases to flintex. + Other tags that start with flint.

Sixteen flint_(* tags.
1) 15 flint_(bad_dragon) character
2) 3 flint_(character) character
3) 3 flint_(das) character
4) 1 flint_(dourdoofus) character
5) 1 flint_(flint270) character
6) 8 flint_(flintexp) character
7) 2 flint_(marin_rabbit) character
8) 3 flint_(mother) character
9) 2 flint_(mute-owl) character
10) 2 flint_(narse) character
11) 3 flint_(pokémon) character
12) 1 flint_(rhydoninator) general
13) 4 flint_(smooshkin) character
14) 1 flint_(stomak) character
15) 1 flint_(unregisteredcat) character
16) 6 flint_(vir-no-vigoratus) character

wiki flint_(artist) says "This tag has been aliased to flintex."

Tags that start with flint:
https://e621.net/tag?name=flint*&type=&order=name

+ other tags that start with flint:
1 flint2m90 artist
3 flint_a._ruby character
1 flint_arterius_(character)
12 flint_king_(character)
1 flint_knapping general : "Wikipedia:"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knapping says "Knapping is the shaping of ... conchoidal fracturing stone through the process of (removing some parts) to manufacture stone tools," (and other stuff).
1 flint_lock general (upload deleted)
4 flint_the_charizard character
21 flint_westwood character
( 3 tags start with flinters )
43 flintex artist
3 flintheart_glomgold character
40 flintlock general
29 flintlock_pistol general
1 flintlock_rifle general
1 flintxd artist

EDIT: The tag alias flint -> flint_(disambiguation) (forum #259853) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The tag alias flint -> flint_(disambiguation) (forum #259853) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

It came to my attention while sifting through this mess that we no longer have any tag for actual flint, as in the mineral. This leaves posts like post #3628835 - correctly tagged with both a character called Flint and the regular flint - in a rather awkward situation.

I know for a fact this isn't the first time something like this has happened, but it turns out we also have no standard for what happens if it does. What should be the canonical name of this tag? flint_(stone), like marble_(stone) and obsidian_(stone)? flint_(rock), like jade_(rock)? Or flint_(mineral), like malachite_(mineral)?

My preference would be to standardise everything on a "mineral" naming scheme, since that matches tags like mineral_humanoid. But since all these tags are obscure, should we pre-emptively add aliases from all the possible "rock" and "stone" variants to make them easier to find?

wat8548 said:
It came to my attention while sifting through this mess that we no longer have any tag for actual flint, as in the mineral. This leaves posts like post #3628835 - correctly tagged with both a character called Flint and the regular flint - in a rather awkward situation.

I know for a fact this isn't the first time something like this has happened, but it turns out we also have no standard for what happens if it does. What should be the canonical name of this tag? flint_(stone), like marble_(stone) and obsidian_(stone)? flint_(rock), like jade_(rock)? Or flint_(mineral), like malachite_(mineral)?

My preference would be to standardise everything on a "mineral" naming scheme, since that matches tags like mineral_humanoid. But since all these tags are obscure, should we pre-emptively add aliases from all the possible "rock" and "stone" variants to make them easier to find?

I'd say that flint_(mineral) makes the most sense to me... Except how do we know it's actually flint? It's a type of quartz, that's often brown/tan, but it can be other colors. We know it for sure if it's in a rifle or lighter, but those have their own tags?

:edit: TIL https://geology.com/rocks/flint-chert-jasper/

The bulk update request #3672 is active.

change category flint_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid
create alias marble_(stone) (2) -> marble_(mineral) (1)
create alias obsidian_(stone) (3) -> obsidian_(mineral) (2)
create alias jade_(rock) (4) -> jade_(mineral) (1)

Reason: All these mineral tags are ambiguous in their base forms, usually due to also being popular character names. We should provide a consistent method of clarifying that a tag was actually referring to the mineral instead of leaving it up to guesswork.

Also fix the category of the flint tag which started this.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3672 (forum #351722) has been approved by @slyroon.

aliasing to (mineral) tags seems ok to me.
(except maybe obsidian_(stone) -> obsidian_(rock) ??)
(edit: that being said aliasing to obsidian_(mineral) might make tagging slightly easier)

Quotes from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jade
"Jade is a mineral ..."

*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marble
"Marble is a metamorphic rock composed of recrystallized carbonate minerals ..."
"Categories: Marble, Sculpture materials, Metasedimentary rocks, Limestone, Stone (material), Symbols of Alabama"

*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsidian
"Obsidian ... is a naturally occurring volcanic glass .... It is an igneous rock. ..."
"Obsidian is mineral-like, but not a true mineral because, as a glass, it is not crystalline; ... It is sometimes classified as a mineraloid"
"Categories: Obsidian, Gemstones, Vitreous rocks, Volcanology"

***
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint
"Flint is a sedimentary cryptocrystalline form of the mineral quartz, ..."

This is sounding familar... A disambiguation I dealt with recently? :goes to look:
No, apparently not. I could have sworn it was for *stone* tags...

The bulk update request #3672 (forum #351722) has been approved by @slyroon.