The tag implication #47365 leaked_pre-release_pokemon -> leaked_contents has been rejected.

Reason: To make a new tag leaked_contents and make its meaning "unreleased content discovered through unauthorized means and/or before official info".

Here is the previous conversation between me and @Watsit：
(Already Rejected) Tag implication: leaked_pokemon -> spoiler

～～～～～～～～～
While every tag requires some objective and determining threshold, the "spoiler" threshold could depend on each person.
But everything discovered illegally is still a leak.

Thus, I believe making a leaked_contents tag is appropriate.

And the standard for it would be as follows：
"All contents that cannot be discovered, by those who are gathering info as fast as they can legally viewing official info, and without through any unauthorized ways".
(( Please respond if you have a better way to say it ))

Once either "official pre-release info" or "game releases in any country" has been done, the earlier of them will be the threshold.
And the contents will no longer be "leaked_contents" at that point and then the tag should be removed immediately.

～～～～～～～～～
Of course, the content violates the Posting Unreleased Content rule,
But while in case it cannot be removed immediately, Users can avoid the disadvantage themselves by using their Blacklist.

～～～～～～～～～
Note that the tag spoiler will require disambiguation.

EDIT: The tag implication leaked_pokemon -> leaked_contents (forum #349302) has been rejected by @Kurogi_FoxSIV.

Note also there's a distinction between leaked content, and speculative/rumored content (content which purports to be a leak from unofficial sources, but can't be verified as such).

Also, while the goal may be to apply it to current leaked pokemon, I think the implication should wait. Scarlet/Violet's release is in a few days, and there's currently almost 300 leaked_pokemon posts. With the release imminent, the tags will need to be removed at that time, and it'll be that much harder to remove the extra leaked_contents tags if it'll be on non-Pokemon stuff too.

I probably would have suggested it as leaked_content but as long as it works.

magnuseffect said:
I probably would have suggested it as leaked_content but as long as it works.

AHHHHHHHHHHH

Making another New one after approval would mean Making another the approver's work,
And there is no way to rewrite This one ... right？

I gotta go make the correct one right now!

The tag implication leaked_pokemon -> leaked_contents (forum #349302) has been rejected by @Kurogi_FoxSIV.