Topic: Dragon Colors part 2

Follow up to topic #26971 since the original issue that led to the creation of that BUR hasn't been addressed yet: there are several [color]_dragon tags in use, such as red_dragon, that do not implicate dragon.

To sum up the thread: My original approach was to simply alias all colored dragon tags to dragon based on the wiki for green_dragon. However, after reading suggestions from other uses, the idea became to instead alias them to colored_dragon_(disambiguation), which would itself implicate dragon (solving the original issue). They could then be retagged with the dungeons_and_dragons species (or other copyright) tags if they should be.

I tentatively believe the original BUR may have been rejected because of some of the original down votes that remained after the BUR was edited based on the suggestions. So, before I create a new BUR, I want to get an idea of which approach everyone feels would be best. I don't feel the tags are used readily enough to simply just implicate them to dragon. Should they simply be aliased to dragon (my original BUR) or to the colored_dragon_(disambiguation) tag (this would recreate the edited version of the BUR, which was rejected). Or should this be approached some other way? If it were possible, we could double alias them to [color]_scales & dragon, that would work too!

I suppose we could just keep doing what we've been doing for years, and manually clean them couple of times per year. But I'd say that it'd be simplest to just alias them.

If we do alias them should it be to simply dragon? Or to colored_dragon_(disambiguation) as per this suggestion from the previous thread?

thevileone said:
I think that that tags that coincide with D&D species are better disambiguated perhaps under a single page colored_dragon_(disambiguation). That way, the D&D dragons wont get lost in the dragon tag when people don't add the proper suffix. The disambiguation page could imply dragon for convenience.