The tag alias #59462 visible_bulge -> bulge has been approved.

Reason: All bulges that are compliant with TWYS are, by necessity, visible.

EDIT: The tag alias visible_bulge -> bulge (forum #350941) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

Only 5 posts tagged with visible_bulge, one I have fixed because it was an abdominal_bulge.
Suggest to just manually fix the tags instead of aliasing it straightaway.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Suggest to just manually fix the tags instead of aliasing it straightaway.

I don't think we need the tag at all, so... why bothering fixing it manually?

dubsthefox said:
I don't think we need the tag at all, so... why bothering fixing it manually?

I agree, there aren't many posts using this tag now, but why not alias it while it's not a problem? I believe I saw a few BURs that create aliases of tags with 0 usage already in order to, I assume, prevent future mis-usage.

Any bulge already requires the bulge to be visible in order to be tagged anyways, so visible_bulge is redundant in any scenario I can think of.

m3g4p0n1 said:
I believe I saw a few BURs that create aliases of tags with 0 usage already in order to, I assume, prevent future mis-usage.

There was a user called D.D.M. They did this regularly. ^{_{Their account is deactivated now. I wonder hat happened to them.}} But yeah that's not too unusual.

dubsthefox said:
I don't think we need the tag at all, so... why bothering fixing it manually?

Because it is not in good practice to alias every minute thing to the base tag.

When you can fix it manually, fix it. Don't clog the suggestion queue with small easily fixable things such as this.

If we simply just suggest a new alias because it is "easier this way", it would fill up the wiki page with another unnecessary alias that is messy to look at.

m3g4p0n1 said:
I agree, there aren't many posts using this tag now, but why not alias it while it's not a problem? I believe I saw a few BURs that create aliases of tags with 0 usage already in order to, I assume, prevent future mis-usage.

Any bulge already requires the bulge to be visible in order to be tagged anyways, so visible_bulge is redundant in any scenario I can think of.

Perhaps for uniformity sake? I don't usually see tags with 0 posts being aliased to another tag unless it was a blanket BUR for similarly termed tags.

IMO, if people rarely use the tag in the first place, then it would just be best to remove all posts from it (and cause the "new tag created" popup to appear the next time somebody else uses it and tell them that it is an unused tag).

In addition, i feel that visible_bulge sounds too ambiguous to alias straight to bulge.
It sounds like something someone would say when they see a noticeable "bulge" protruding out of on a belly (i.e., abdominal_bulge).

thegreatwolfgang said:
...remove all posts from it (and cause the "new tag created" popup to appear the next time somebody else uses it and notify them that it is a unused tag).

The color tags are the perfect example that this doesn't work very well.

thegreatwolfgang said:
In addition, i feel that visible_bulge sounds too ambiguous to alias straight to bulge.

Bulge is an ambiguous tag. It would be better to give it the *_(disambiguation) suffix, because it's misused very often... but eh... 104k posts would be a pain in the ass to re-tag.

dubsthefox said:
The color tags are the perfect example that this doesn't work very well.

Doesn't mean that it does not work at all. It is there for people to notice it immediately in the first place, and more diligent people to fix it afterwards.

Bulge is an ambiguous tag. It would be better to give it the *_(disambiguation) suffix, because it's misused very often... but eh... 104k posts would be a pain in the ass to re-tag.

Sounds about right. We can mass update bulge to something like clothing_bulge, then alias it away to bulge_(disambiguation).

Now the question is, would people be keen on the change?

thegreatwolfgang said:
Doesn't mean that it does not work at all. It is there for people to notice it immediately in the first place, and more diligent people to fix it afterwards.

Sounds about right. We can mass update bulge to something like clothing_bulge, then alias it away to bulge_(disambiguation).

Now the question is, would people be keen on the change?

I think it's a disproportionate amount of work and reshuffling to the actual benefit it'll bring. There are far more pressing changes to make.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Doesn't mean that it does not work at all. It is there for people to notice it immediately in the first place, and more diligent people to fix it afterwards.

Yeah, it helps a little. But I still think people should be blocked from applying invalid tags, with a text message, what they can do to solve their mistake.

oozeenthusiast said:
...We can mass update bulge to something like clothing_bulge, then alias it away to bulge_(disambiguation).

I like that. I forgot we can do mass updates.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Now the question is, would people be keen on the change?

I don't see why they shouldn't. It's, more or less, just a name change. The meaning stays the same, but the usage is more obvious.

oozeenthusiast said:
I think it's a disproportionate amount of work and reshuffling to the actual benefit it'll bring.

Not with a mass update, as TheGreatWolfgang mentioned. I am not more involved than writing BURs sometimes, but I don't think this would cause much of a hustle.

oozeenthusiast said:
There are far more pressing changes to make.

Also, I am not a big fan of this argument, unless the worse problem massive. And the worst problems I see right now are the missing janitors and mods for approvals and tickets.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Sounds about right. We can mass update bulge to something like clothing_bulge, then alias it away to bulge_(disambiguation).

I think crotch_bulge would work better. A clothing bulge can still be a result of an abdominal bulge with a form-fitting shirt or skin-tight suit, or because something is climbing around in someone's clothes, causing a visible lump anywhere on someone's body, so is just as ambiguous as bulge.

this whole conversation suggests the concept of an implied bulge. 'This guy looks like he's packing. I can't see it but I'm getting some big dick energy.'

The tag alias visible_bulge -> bulge (forum #350941) has been approved by @gattonero2001.