The tag implication #45493 clover_(disambiguation) -> plant has been rejected.

Reason: for some reason this isn’t there already

EDIT: The tag implication clover -> plant (forum #340616) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

I feel like clover is something that'd have a lot of potential for mistags, maybe it should be disambiguated.

darryus said:
I feel like clover is something that'd have a lot of potential for mistags, maybe it should be disambiguated.

New rule: Whenever someone makes this exact comment, they must provide both at least one example of a tag it could plausibly be mistaken for and at least one example of such a mistag actually happening.

wat8548 said:
New rule: Whenever someone makes this exact comment, they must provide both at least one example of a tag it could plausibly be mistaken for and at least one example of such a mistag actually happening.

There's quite a few tags it could plausibly be mistaken for. And here's some mistags.

I suggest updating clover to clover_(plant) and then aliasing clover to clover_(disambiguation). Because, yes, there are a honkin' lot of characters named ''clover'', thus increasing by a lot the chances of a mistag.

Doggone it. Watsit gets there first. :p

The bulk update request #2911 is active.

create implication clover_(plant) (876) -> plant (324956)
create implication clover_leaf (325) -> clover_(plant) (876)
create implication clover_leaf (325) -> leaf (23074)
mass update clover -> clover_(plant)
change category clover_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid
remove implication four_leaf_clover (303) -> clover (0)

Reason: For all our objections to their specific solution, cheshire3rd is correct in essence. Clover as a tag does need a rework. However, cheshire3rd's request will unfortunately need to be rejected first.

• Clover_(plant) already exists and makes it clear which clover it is intended to represent, even when it's a generic clover shape. Thus, it ought to be the new base tag, with cheshire3rd's suggested implication as above. Alternatively, a clover_(shape) tag can be created and added to more abstract clover shapes, but I think this would just be adding unnecessary complexity to the tags.
• Clover_leaf is just a variant of clover and can be safely aliased to it. If someone wants to tag the highway version, cloverleaf_interchange can be created.
• Obviously, we can't alias clover to clover_(disambiguation) until it's been updated to clover_(disambiguation) (well, we could, but that would just give us more work than we need to do), but nothing stops us from converting clover_(disambiguation) to the Invalid category now.
• Also four_leaf_clover has to be unimplied from clover before we can alias away the latter.

alias clover -> clover_(disambiguation)
imply four_leaf_clover -> clover_(plant)

Addendum ~ changed the alias of clover_leaf -> clover_(plant) to an implication and added the implication to leaf, as per scaliespe's suggestion below.

EDIT: The bulk update request #2911 (forum #340629) has been approved by @slyroon.

wat8548 said:
New rule: Whenever someone makes this exact comment, they must provide both at least one example of a tag it could plausibly be mistaken for and at least one example of such a mistag actually happening.

you can see a mistag on the posts section of the wiki for clover

clawstripe said:
The bulk update request #2911 is active.

create implication clover_(plant) (876) -> plant (324956)
create implication clover_leaf (325) -> clover_(plant) (876)
create implication clover_leaf (325) -> leaf (23074)
mass update clover -> clover_(plant)
change category clover_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid
remove implication four_leaf_clover (303) -> clover (0)

Reason: For all our objections to their specific solution, cheshire3rd is correct in essence. Clover as a tag does need a rework. However, cheshire3rd's request will unfortunately need to be rejected first.

• Clover_(plant) already exists and makes it clear which clover it is intended to represent, even when it's a generic clover shape. Thus, it ought to be the new base tag, with cheshire3rd's suggested implication as above. Alternatively, a clover_(shape) tag can be created and added to more abstract clover shapes, but I think this would just be adding unnecessary complexity to the tags.
• Clover_leaf is just a variant of clover and can be safely aliased to it. If someone wants to tag the highway version, cloverleaf_interchange can be created.
• Obviously, we can't alias clover to clover_(disambiguation) until it's been updated to clover_(disambiguation) (well, we could, but that would just give us more work than we need to do), but nothing stops us from converting clover_(disambiguation) to the Invalid category now.
• Also four_leaf_clover has to be unimplied from clover before we can alias away the latter.

alias clover -> clover_(disambiguation)
imply four_leaf_clover -> clover_(disambiguation)

Should clover imply leaf, perhaps?

clawstripe said:

imply four_leaf_clover -> clover_(disambiguation)

Did you intend to propose an implication to an invalid tag there?

wat8548 said:
Did you intend to propose an implication to an invalid tag there?

Oh, whoops. Good catch. Thanks.

scaliespe said:
Should clover imply leaf, perhaps?

It could, I suppose, as leaves are basically what makes clover recognizable as clover. Personally, I think of the tag leaf as applying to situations when there's a tree leaf (usually) that's separate from the parent plant or in some way is prominent in the picture. So, in that regard, I guess an implication would work. Opinions?

clawstripe said:
It could, I suppose, as leaves are basically what makes clover recognizable as clover.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clover

Clover or trefoil are common names for plants of the genus Trifolium (...)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trifolium_hybridum

It has a pretty visually distinct flower. I would rather not create that implication.

gattonero2001 said:
It has a pretty visually distinct flower. I would rather not create that implication.

Fine with me. I didn't really want to make it either, but the question did need to be addressed.

gattonero2001 said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clover

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trifolium_hybridum

It has a pretty visually distinct flower. I would rather not create that implication.

That raises the question of whether or not anybody using the clover tag is actually meaning the flower, or even the plant itself. It seems rare at best. The leaf is quite ubiquitous. The flower is distinct, sure, but not ubiquitous like the symbol of the clover leaf is.

Alternatively, Clawstripe, what if, rather than aliasing clover_leaf to clover_(plant), you imply it, and have clover_leaf also imply leaf? That way, we retain a tag that is specifically for the leaf itself when it appears as a solitary object or a symbol, and the clover_(plant) tag can safely include depictions of the entire plant when it occurs. Thoughts on that?

scaliespe said:
Alternatively, Clawstripe, what if, rather than aliasing clover_leaf to clover_(plant), you imply it, and have clover_leaf also imply leaf? That way, we retain a tag that is specifically for the leaf itself when it appears as a solitary object or a symbol, and the clover_(plant) tag can safely include depictions of the entire plant when it occurs. Thoughts on that?

That could work. Anyone else have an opinion?

The tag implication clover -> plant (forum #340616) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

Changed the alias of clover_leaf -> clover_(plant) to an implication and added the implication to leaf, as per scaliespe's suggestion above. You may want to reassess your vote for that BUR if you don't agree with the changes.

The bulk update request #2911 (forum #340629) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #6542 is active.

create alias clover (0) -> clover_(disambiguation) (0)
create implication four_leaf_clover (303) -> clover_(plant) (876)

Reason: Followup

EDIT: The bulk update request #6542 (forum #390759) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #6542 (forum #390759) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #6564 is active.

remove implication four_leaf_clover (303) -> clover_(plant) (876)
create implication four_leaf_clover (303) -> clover_leaf (325)

Reason: Seems like we missed something here.
The followup was originally written before we decided to make clover_leaf a separate tag, and it wasn't updated to account for the existence of that tag. Seeing as a four-leaf clover is a particular type of clover leaf (actually a bit of a misnomer as well, as it's technically just a single leaf that has four distinct leaflets instead of the usual three), the tag should imply clover_leaf rather than clover_(plant).

EDIT: The bulk update request #6564 (forum #390884) has been approved by @slyroon.

bump

The bulk update request #6564 (forum #390884) has been approved by @slyroon.

…now what do we do about shamrock

scaliespe said:
…now what do we do about shamrock

Disambiguate, and use either three_leaf_clover or shamrock_(plant) for the plant which implicates clover_leaf.