Topic: Tag Implication: water_dragon -> dragon

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

A German Shepherd is a dog, we still tag both.

Updated by anonymous

Halite said:
A German Shepherd is a dog, we still tag both.

That's for common species that everyone would know and I agree of having that(mostly bcuz people would want to find their favourite dogs!).

But for uncommon species names like the Australian Water Dragon, we would tag it with only lizard(as most people can't tell the difference between this and other species of lizards).

We don't need to tag every species of lizards with it's own name.

Updated by anonymous

But we need a tag specific enough to label an imaginary type of creature that happens to be in water?
I think your priorities are a bit mixed up.

Updated by anonymous

Halite said:
But we need a tag specific enough to label an imaginary type of creature that happens to be in water?
I think your priorities are a bit mixed up.

What are you trying to say?

Should we imply this with dragon or should we just imply water_dragon with invalid_tag?

This tag is already being used by most users as a species tag for dragons that live in the water.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

Halite said:
But we need a tag specific enough to label an imaginary type of creature that happens to be in water?

Considering the number of users who keep tagging those? Yes, we clearly need one. At least it's better than tagging them by color: 'dragons who live in water' is more of a common theme than 'dragons who happen to be blue'.

But I suppose we could use aquatic dragon tag for those? I'm not in favor of sea dragon, that seems too specific.

Edit: vvv I'll wait a few more days in case that someone disagrees, but if not, I'll go ahead and tag script those under aquatic_dragon.

Updated by anonymous

  • 1