The tag alias #56312 coffee_mug -> mug_of_coffee has been rejected.

Reason: i think its most useful to classify mugs based on what they contain, and I think writing the tag this way conveys that better.

Any mug becomes a mug_of_coffee when it has coffee inside. Simple and unambiguous.

EDIT: The tag alias coffee_mug -> mug_of_coffee (forum #325895) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

What if the coffee mug is empty? Better reversed, IMO, since there's no saying what may be in a coffee mug.

watsit said: What if the coffee mug is empty?

Is it possible to tell a coffee_mug apart from a regular mug if it's empty?

bitwolfy said:
Is it possible to tell a coffee_mug apart from a regular mug if it's empty?

It should be worth noting that prior to @Snergal's suggestion, the previous coffee_mug wiki was this. The wiki was thereafter edited by them to fit this new definition.

bitwolfy said:
Is it possible to tell a coffee_mug apart from a regular mug if it's empty?

I could probably be inferred, like if there's a coffee pot or coffee maker in the picture also, or some kind of "I <3 Coffee" design on the mug. Perhaps also a spilled mug, with the mug tipped over and empty and coffee spilled on the ground.

It looks like most people use coffee_mug interchangeably with mug, even if you can't see the coffee or anything like a bathrobe. E.g. of the first 9 posts, only three of them justify coffee_mug imo. This may require cleanup, or possibly just alias coffee_mug -> mug, and have people tag mug and coffee separately.

matrixmash said:
It looks like most people use coffee_mug interchangeably with mug, even if you can't see the coffee or anything like a bathrobe. E.g. of the first 9 posts, only three of them justify coffee_mug imo. This may require cleanup, or possibly just alias coffee_mug -> mug, and have people tag mug and coffee separately.

+1 for aliasing

The tag alias coffee_mug -> mug_of_coffee (forum #325895) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.