The tag alias #74499 drawing -> drawing_(disambiguation) has been rejected.

Reason: The tag drawing seems to cover both the action of drawing as well as physical drawings, be them on paper or on bodies. Additionally, it's also frequently misused as a meta tag when either traditional_media_(artwork) or digital_drawing_(artwork) would be what they were looking for.

I propose disambiguating the tag and having the wiki page list drawing_(action), drawing_(object), drawing_in_a_drawing and drawing_on_body in one section with traditional_media_(artwork) and digital_drawing_(artwork)in the meta section. How does this sound?

EDIT: The tag alias drawing -> drawing_(disambiguation) (forum #434042) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

munchmallow-frosty said:
I propose disambiguating the tag and having the wiki page list drawing_(action), drawing_(object), drawing_in_a_drawing and drawing_on_body in one section

There's no need for drawing_in_a_drawing or drawing_on_body. The former would be equally ambiguous if it's referring to an object or action, which are already mentioned as tags. It's also unnecessarily limited to being in drawings, when animations are also a thing. There's also a body_drawing tag already, which would make drawing_on_body redundant (drawing_on_body would also be confusing if the drawing is no longer happening and you only see the result, where body_drawing would work for both active drawing and the result).

watsit said:
(drawing_on_body would also be confusing if the drawing is no longer happening and you only see the result, where body_drawing would work for both active drawing and the result).

I mean, I'd say we already have tags for both. body_drawing could be used for in-progress drawing, where as body_art could be for the result. That or alias one away and use one for both.

watsit said:
There's no need for drawing_in_a_drawing or drawing_on_body. The former would be equally ambiguous if it's referring to an object or action, which are already mentioned as tags. It's also unnecessarily limited to being in drawings, when animations are also a thing. There's also a body_drawing tag already, which would make drawing_on_body redundant (drawing_on_body would also be confusing if the drawing is no longer happening and you only see the result, where body_drawing would work for both active drawing and the result).

felt to me like a more humorous meta tag for drawings that had in-universe drawings within them, so it doesn't need to be on every post tagged with drawing_(object).

munchmallow-frosty said:
drawing_in_a_drawing felt to me like a more humorous meta tag for drawings that had in-universe drawings within them, so it doesn't need to be on every post tagged with drawing_(object).

I don't understand. drawing_(object) is for when a drawing appears in the post (i.e. an in-universe drawing). How is that different from drawings that have in-universe drawings within them (aside from being limited to drawings, and not 3D renders or animations), and how does that make it a "humanoid meta tag"?

watsit said:
I don't understand. drawing_(object) is for when a drawing appears in the post (i.e. an in-universe drawing). How is that different from drawings that have in-universe drawings within them (aside from being limited to drawings, and not 3D renders or animations), and how does that make it a "humanoid meta tag"?

is for all instances of an in-universe drawing within the post regardless of what media type the post is, while drawing_in_a_drawing is for when the post itself is also a drawing. It reads as humorous to me because of how it points out the recursive nature of having a drawing with a drawing inside of it.

Bump. It's been a while.

munchmallow-frosty said:
drawing_(object) is for all instances of an in-universe drawing within the post regardless of what media type the post is, while drawing_in_a_drawing is for when the post itself is also a drawing. It reads as humorous to me because of how it points out the recursive nature of having a drawing with a drawing inside of it.

I don't think we need a tag for a drawing_(object) that appears in a post that is specifically a drawing vs a non-drawing. Since most posts here are drawings, most depictions of a drawing_(object) will statistically be in drawings. I don't see what makes it inherently humorous, any more than a TV appearing on a TV show, or a seeing a phone in a video on your phone. If the scene calls for a drawing_(object), and you're drawing the scene, it's normal for a drawing to be in a drawing. Any humor in such posts is a result of the scene itself, like post #5115633 or post #5111094, not because there's a drawing in the drawing specifically.

The tag alias drawing -> drawing_(disambiguation) (forum #434042) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

hmmm, so drawing is a valid tag, for now
Or is this just the regular disambiguation purge

Why was this rejected? It had more upvotes than downvotes. Did I do something wrong?

munchmallow-frosty said:
Why was this rejected? It had more upvotes than downvotes. Did I do something wrong?

Upvotes and downvotes technically do not have any impact on the outcome of an AIBUR unless an admin explicitly says so (the use of votes is to help identify good/bad AIBURs relatively quickly, and dissenting votes (accompanied with an explanation) is a signal to think more about approving/rejecting the BUR). You have done nothing wrong.

snpthecat said:
Upvotes and downvotes technically do not have any impact on the outcome of an AIBUR unless an admin explicitly says so (the use of votes is to help identify good/bad AIBURs relatively quickly, and dissenting votes (accompanied with an explanation) is a signal to think more about approving/rejecting the BUR). You have done nothing wrong.

So it doesn't matter how many upvotes the post has as long as there's one counter-argument that's convincing enough?

munchmallow-frosty said:
So it doesn't matter how many upvotes the post has as long as there's a single well worded counter-argument?

To be more accurate, approvals are up to admin fiat, approvals are dependent on convincing them

snpthecat said:
To be more accurate, approvals are up to admin fiat

I see, that makes sense. Thanks.