The tag alias #59048 quiver_(arrows) -> quiver has been rejected.

Reason: Pretty sure they both mean the same thing - a container full of arrows, usually carried by an archer.

Quiver is more popular (1241 to 21), and is also the one documented on the wiki.

EDIT: The tag alias quiver_(arrows) -> quiver (forum #346908) has been rejected by @kora_viridian.

quiv·er
/ˈkwivər/
verb: quiver; 3rd person present: quivers; past tense: quivered; past participle: quivered; gerund or present participle: quivering

    tremble or shake with a slight rapid motion.

    cause (something) to make a slight rapid motion.

noun: quiver; plural noun: quivers

    a slight trembling movement or sound, especially one caused by a sudden strong emotion.

darryus said:
[snippet]

Even though that's the case, it is obviously neither the intended by the wiki page, nor the actual usage of the tag in the relevant pictures.

That definition would probably go for something like shaking or trembling...

darryus said:
[dictionary]

saphirel said:
That definition would probably go for something like shaking or trembling...

I think that meaning is handled by the existing quivering -> trembling alias.

saphirel said:
Even though that's the case, it is obviously neither the intended by the wiki page, nor the actual usage of the tag in the relevant pictures.

That definition would probably go for something like shaking or trembling...

then we should either flip the alias so the disambiguation parenthetical is attached or just disambiguate the tag. ambiguous tag names are always bad.

Considering that both arrow_(weapon) and bow_(weapon) have been moved to those tags to clarify their meanings, I could see something similar happening here. If it's needed.

However, I ran a bunch of searches for quiver + things like being scared, shaking, trembling, etc. Then I triple checked that from the other direction by running this search: quiver -quiver_(arrows) -arrow_(weapon) -bow_(weapon). And then I added arrow_(weapon) to all of the ones that applied. And then added quiver_(arrows) to all of the ones that were for the object but maybe didn't qualify for the arrows_(weapon) tag (so: empty quivers, closed quivers, when the arrows weren't very clear to see by themselves/more implied, or when the quiver was being used to carry something else like scrolls...etc).

Leaving only the mistags, which I didn't correct yet only so that we could easily see what problems may or may not happen if we keep it as is.

But I don't think it's actually much of a mess. Because it only turned up a handful of images without an actual quiver shown in them. About 44 mistags, out of a 1.2k tag. And they look like they span once every so often over the last 9-ish years. That pattern usually means a tag that has never been cleaned for it, and yet still has almost no mistags at all, really. Also, out of those misplaced images, some of them don't have any obvious reason for either meaning of the tag, so they may be mistags regardless. Two look like a satchel instead, for instance. One has a chest strap that could lead to anything at all.

Which leaves even less where trembling or shaking is clearly happening but they picked the wrong tag. Which means that this mistake doesn't seem to be happening very often, barely at all. Certainly within the range of 'some mistags will still happen regardless' because every tag needs cleaning now and then. So I'm not convinced we need to disambiguate or do anything too drastic to it.

But if we are going to alias quiver and quiver_(arrows) then I'd prefer it go the other way (just for clarity of purpose). Either that or make something like quiver_(object) since that might be more accurate when the quiver is empty, closed, or being used to carry other items (like scrolls in one image I saw). Not sure how much it matters. Either way, the alias will automatically handle anyone who didn't think to check for a suffix on it so it won't actually complicate anything to add it. But it will make it more obvious which meaning is intended. Which is always nice.

TL;DR -
- disambiguation probably not needed. It's actually amazingly clean for a tag of its size that is probably not being checked for mistags (and after almost a decade of use). So an alias should work fine without any added intervention.
- But a suffix for clarity is nice and shouldn't add any complication, so maybe flip it to go the other way.
- I didn't correct the mistags yet, so that people could still see what was there. I'll have to remember to double back for those though at some point. But if they're still in there after a month, that probably means I forgot about it.

furrypickle said:
- I didn't correct the mistags yet, so that people could still see what was there. I'll have to remember to double back for those though at some point. But if they're still in there after a month, that probably means I forgot about it.

it's usually easier to quantify the mistags after them being removed, actually, since you can just look at the tag edits that have the tag removed

darryus said:
it's usually easier to quantify the mistags after them being removed, actually, since you can just look at the tag edits that have the tag removed

That depends on whether someone tends to think in numbers vs thinking visually. Just the tag history alone is a wall of links, data, and numbers. If someone thinks that way, then that's directly to the important info with no distractions. But if someone thinks visually, then being able to literally see the results with the thumbs is a lot quicker to grasp what was tagged with it (and viewing just the tag history alone quickly loses overall context). Since tagging tends to attract both types of thinkers, I gave the data but also left it easily visible while the discussion was still new. So a bit of both angles.

furrypickle said:
That depends on whether someone tends to think in numbers vs thinking visually. Just the tag history alone is a wall of links, data, and numbers. If someone thinks that way, then that's directly to the important info with no distractions. But if someone thinks visually, then being able to literally see the results with the thumbs is a lot quicker to grasp what was tagged with it (and viewing just the tag history alone quickly loses overall context). Since tagging tends to attract both types of thinkers, I gave the data but also left it easily visible while the discussion was still new. So a bit of both angles.

yeah, but when the posts are still up there's a lot of like "noise" of the correctly tagged items making it much harder to parse what stuff is even mistags, you often have to click on the thumbnails anyway to even tell for sure.
also there's like 1280 posts that have the tag.

I would have expected quiver to need to be disambiguated from trembling but furrypickle makes a convincing evidence-based argument that this is not needed. +1.

The tag alias quiver_(arrows) -> quiver (forum #346908) has been rejected by @kora_viridian.

The majority didn't like it, and aliases aren't getting approved anymore anyway, so it's gone.

kora_viridian said:
The majority didn't like it, and aliases aren't getting approved anymore anyway, so it's gone.

It's only a majority if you count neutral as negative.

The bulk update request #6460 is active.

create alias quiver (3) -> quiver_(object) (1575)
create alias quiver_(arrows) (3) -> quiver_(object) (1575)

Reason: The quiver tag is relatively free of mistags so an alias wouldn't hurt. Not aliasing to quiver_(arrows) as it would be accurate even if the quiver was closed.

EDIT: The bulk update request #6460 (forum #390146) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #6460 (forum #390146) has been approved by @slyroon.