Aliasing gender -> invalid_tag.

Reason: Way too ambiguous of a tag; is better replaced with any of the other gender tags we use. I removed the instances of its use (it was only in use seven times); I vote for aliasing it out to prevent further usage.

I agree.

I don't think we even need this to exist

Rainbow_Dash said:
I don't think we even need this to exist

So does that mean you agree, or...?

I agree with this alias.

Well apparently this tag alias was considered unnecessary by Ippiki, because I just got a notification that it was deleted for that reason.

So much for consensus.

corgi_bread said:
Well apparently this tag alias was considered unnecessary by Ippiki, because I just got a notification that it was deleted for that reason.

So much for consensus.

Ippi is well-known to "do his own thing" at all times and in all circumstances.

corgi_bread said:
Well apparently this tag alias was considered unnecessary by Ippiki, because I just got a notification that it was deleted for that reason.

So much for consensus.

How many instances of this tag were there before tag was removed? I can't really tell because tag history is not working, but if there were few tags then maybe there is no sense in making alias for them - just removing it would be enough.

But despite of everything, if admin is removing alias suggestion he/she could really post reasoning on the forum. This really could be made as a rule, or be automated, as I once suggested in feature request thread.

https://e621.net/post?tags=gender

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
How many instances of this tag were there before tag was removed? I can't really tell because tag history is not working, but if there were few tags then maybe there is no sense in making alias for them - just removing it would be enough.

But despite of everything, if admin is removing alias suggestion he/she could really post reasoning on the forum. This really could be made as a rule, or be automated, as I once suggested in feature request thread.

None at the moment, but that's because I fixed them all in preparation for submitting the alias a few days ago. I'm not sure when we decided that only tags that see a ton of use are eligible for aliasing to something else, but even if a tag is only used sparingly aliasing it helps prevent improper usage and making extra work for other people to change it.

From what I can see, many of those were added when someone tried to tag the images with ambiguous_gender and forgot the underscore. The other half is in ambiguous, which I just cleaned up a bit. (There were about twenty of those.)

Aliasing this to invalid_tag would make it easier to spot such mistakes.

corgi_bread said:
None at the moment, but that's because I fixed them all in preparation for submitting the alias a few days ago. I'm not sure when we decided that only tags that see a ton of use are eligible for aliasing to something else, but even if a tag is only used sparingly aliasing it helps prevent improper usage and making extra work for other people to change it.

That's why I'm asking in past tense and complain that I can't open tag history - I want to know how many were removed.

There were many alias suggestions in the past that were unapproved because there was no evidence that it would become popular mistake in the future. If I remember correctly, (sorry, I don't know how to effectively search on this forum) the reason was that it is unwise to make list of alias/implication more complex without good reason.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
That's why I'm asking in past tense and complain that I can't open tag history - I want to know how many were removed.

It was only used seven times.

why does that tag even exist?

corgi_bread said:
So does that mean you agree, or...?

Yes I agree and it will be implemented when I do my weekly alias task

Rainbow_Dash said:
Yes I agree and it will be implemented when I do my weekly alias task

Yay! This is why you're awesome. =)

ETA: It sounds like everyone is awesome. This makes me happy. =)

For the record, I approved this days ago.

ippiki_ookami said:
For the record, I approved this days ago.

Yeah, Dave and I saw that. I figured you had misclicked or something when I got the dmail about it being unapproved.