The bulk update request #11732 has been rejected.

mass update stole_(clothing) -> stole

Reason: I don't think the suffix is necessary for this one.

EDIT: The bulk update request #11732 (forum #459727) has been rejected by @spe.

Given that it's a fairly niche peice of clothing, and stole as a past tense steal is far more common in conversational English, I think keeping the explanatory brackets is sensible.

beholding said:
The bulk update request #11732 has been rejected.

mass update stole_(clothing) -> stole

Reason: I don't think the suffix is necessary for this one.

It is very rarely used to refer to instances of stealing, though in principle, we would want to avoid any ambiguities such as this in the tag's name.
Suggest to either manually purge/mass update the stole tag and leave the tag as is, or disambiguate into stole_(disambiguation).

The bulk update request #11732 (forum #459727) has been rejected by @spe.

thegreatwolfgang said:
It is very rarely used to refer to instances of stealing, though in principle, we would want to avoid any ambiguities such as this in the tag's name.
Suggest to either manually purge/mass update the stole tag and leave the tag as is, or disambiguate into stole_(disambiguation).

I think only 8 mistags over 9 years doesn't necessitate a disambiguation.

Should we do it the other way around, then? mass update stole -> stole_(clothing)?

sounds out of place for a tag name as a past-tense verb. It sounds to me that it should be stolen, an adjective describing an object, or stealing, the present-tense verb.

beholding said:
I think only 8 mistags over 9 years doesn't necessitate a disambiguation.

Should we do it the other way around, then? mass update stole -> stole_(clothing)?

I like this idea. Maybe as an alias though, rather than a mass update? As you point out, the rate of mistagging is pretty low.l

beholding said:
I think only 8 mistags over 9 years doesn't necessitate a disambiguation.

Should we do it the other way around, then? mass update stole -> stole_(clothing)?

That is one of the viable options. As I said, we could simply just mass update stole to stole_(clothing) and then leave stole unaliased to anything in the hopes that nobody uses it anymore.

The other option would be to mass update as usual, but then alias stole to stole_(disambiguation).
The downside to this is that it is not necessary for the time being due to the low mistag count, but it could be helpful to prevent future use of the tag.

quenir said:
I like this idea. Maybe as an alias though, rather than a mass update? As you point out, the rate of mistagging is pretty low.l

Not the proper way of doing it. We don't want to alias a vaguely-named tag to a specifically-named tag, unless it is to a disambiguation tag.

The bulk update request #11747 is active.

mass update stole -> stole_(clothing)

Reason:

alias stole -> stole_(disambiguation)
category stole_(disambiguation) -> invalid

As suggested.

EDIT: The bulk update request #11747 (forum #459861) has been approved by @spe.

The bulk update request #11747 (forum #459861) has been approved by @spe.

The bulk update request #11764 is pending approval.

create alias stole (0) -> stole_(disambiguation) (0)
change category stole_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid

Reason: Followup.