Topic: [REJECTED] Tag alias: biscuit_(food) -> cookie

The tag alias #81146 biscuit_(food) -> cookie has been rejected.

Reason: The word cookie is more used than biscuit due its unused.

EDIT: The tag alias biscuit_(food) -> cookie (forum #474872) has been rejected by @iSuh.

A biscuit and a cookie are in no way the same thing

I know in the uk they like call cookies biscuits, but this is not a cookie, it's a biscuit

The wikipage for biscuit (food) seems to be using the UK definition but the implications imply the US definition (it implies bread, cookie implies food)

I can't find another name for biscuit so the wikipage really should just be rewritten, the implications are already in place for the US version

donovan_dmc said:
I can't find another name for biscuit so the wikipage really should just be rewritten, the implications are already in place for the US version

biscuit_(bread)? that's what Wikipedia uses.

biscuit cookies do seem to be a subset of cookie rather than all cookies, with them being specifically the hard, cracker-y things. like, most of the stuff you'd get in a box at the store, or like, Girl Scout cookies would be biscuits, where as the slightly softer/airier stuff that you'd get from a bakery or make in your oven would more often be a cookie.
I'm not sure if the differentiation makes sense to make on here, though, especially when it seems like there's some inconsistency and overlap. we could probably just alias biscuit_(cookie) to cookie so it shows up in the autocomplete.

Half the tag actually seems to be dog biscuits (and I'm pretty sure Americans don't call those dog cookies, that's something entirely different in the furry fandom) so it would probably be best if we just aliased biscuit_(food) to biscuit_(disambiguation) (already exists) because really.. it's no less ambiguous than biscuit itself.

From there, we can have:

• cookie, with biscuit_(cookie) aliased to it (because we all love Americentrism)
• biscuit_(bread)
• dog_treat
• probably some characters named Biscuit too

edit: added a wiki for biscuit_(disambiguation), since nobody ever made it.

faucet said:
Half the tag actually seems to be dog biscuits (and I'm pretty sure Americans don't call those dog cookies, that's something entirely different in the furry fandom) so it would probably be best if we just aliased biscuit_(food) to biscuit_(disambiguation) (already exists) because really.. it's no less ambiguous than biscuit itself.

From there, we can have:

• cookie, with biscuit_(cookie) aliased to it (because we all love Americentrism)
• biscuit_(bread)
• dog_treat
• probably some characters named Biscuit too

edit: added a wiki for biscuit_(disambiguation), since nobody ever made it.

All of that seems reasonable

The bulk update request #12782 has been rejected.

create implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> biscuit_(cookie) (0)
create implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> biscuit_(disambiguation) (17)
mass update coffee_cups -> coffee_cup
create implication coffee_cup (2553) -> coffee (8962)
create implication coffee_mug (4583) -> coffee (8962)

Reason: Ok, after think a lot, I've come to a conclusion — there's nothing more ambiguous itself than biscuit_(cookie) as considered subcategory uk of american version cookie.

Actually, considering ambiguous factors, I've had made some aliases changes at second topic, because I was rectified integration between coffee and cup. Just separately them as a compliment tags, not integrative reach other.

EDIT: The bulk update request #12782 (forum #474894) has been rejected by @iSuh.

The tag alias biscuit_(food) -> cookie (forum #474872) has been rejected by @iSuh.

isuh said:
create implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> biscuit_(cookie) (0)
create implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> biscuit_(disambiguation) (17)
mass update coffee_cups -> coffee_cup
create implication coffee_cup (2551) -> coffee (8959)
create implication coffee_mug (4584) -> coffee (8959)

This whole request is erroneously done, please put in some effort and learn what each of the e621:Tag Relationships actually mean.

Breaking down each one of these by points:

• create implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> biscuit_(cookie) (0)
• create implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> biscuit_(disambiguation) (17)

What the above does is make it so that every time biscuit_(food) is tagged, both biscuit_(cookie) and biscuit_(disambiguation) are also tagged with it.
This does not make sense as we are trying to invalidate/disambiguate biscuit_(food) completely and prevent it from being used again.

What you should be doing is aliasing biscuit_(food) to biscuit_(disambiguation), but not before unimplying bread from the former first (due to BUR limitations).

• mass update coffee_cups -> coffee_cup

This does absolutely nothing as an alias already exists between the two tags.

• create implication coffee_cup (2551) -> coffee (8959)
• create implication coffee_mug (4584) -> coffee (8959)

Considering milk does not get implied to milk_container, the same should be done with the coffee_* tags.
However, this needs to be in a completely separate thread/BUR since it has nothing to do with the original discussion about cookies and biscuits.

The bulk update request #12783 is pending approval.

remove implication biscuit_(food) (65) -> bread (3675)

Reason: forum #474878

The bulk update request #12782 (forum #474894) has been rejected by @iSuh.