Posted under Tags
BUR #20152 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
create implication star-shaped_food -> food
create implication star-shaped_food -> star_(symbol)
Turns out we have a tag now for food that is shaped like a star now, as is often the case in anime art. Pretty small tag right now, but we can totally populate it. But for now, let's implicate it to food and star (symbol), respectively, as that is what they are.
BUR #20153 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
create implication star-shaped_cookie -> star-shaped_food
create implication star-shaped_cookie -> cookie
Also, there's one for cookies specifically for some reason. I'm not sure if people would prefer this be aliased to star-shaped food or implicated to it, but I personally feel stars are a common enough cookie shape for me to feel willing enough to implicate it. Also a small tag in need of further populating, but I can see it being a decently big tag in the future, along with star-shaped food.
May I suggest adding an implication for paopu fruit to one of your BURs as well? They are also star-shaped food.
BUR #20155 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
create implication starfruit -> star-shaped_food
create implication starfruit -> fruit
create implication paopu_fruit -> starfruit
I don't see why we could not, considering they appear to be based off starfruit to me (which also needs to be implicated now).
You might want to edit the wiki I just created for paopu fruit afterwards though, as I am not familiar enough with Kingdom Hearts to really write anything more than a barebones description.
Edit: Forgot to tack on a fruit request.
Updated
Maiden_in_Orange said:
You might want to edit the wiki I just created for paopu fruit afterwards though, as I am not familiar enough with Kingdom Hearts to really write anything more than a barebones description.
The wiki looks good to me. There is a bit more to the fruit than that, but nothing that would help with tagging, so it's optional.
Blank_User said:
The wiki looks good to me. There is a bit more to the fruit than that, but nothing that would help with tagging, so it's optional.
Sounds good. I don't usually write full wiki pages for copyrights I am unfamiliar with, so I wasn't sure if there was anything else about it that someone might need to know about it.
Maiden_in_Orange said:
BUR #20155 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
create implication starfruit -> star-shaped_food
create implication starfruit -> fruit
create implication paopu_fruit -> starfruitI don't see why we could not, considering they appear to be based off starfruit to me (which also needs to be implicated now).
You might want to edit the wiki I just created for paopu fruit afterwards though, as I am not familiar enough with Kingdom Hearts to really write anything more than a barebones description.
Edit: Forgot to tack on a fruit request.
Wouldn't star shaped food be more for things that were MADE into a star shape by people? I wouldn't make star fruit implicate it but the other two look fine.
Edit: Wait, it turns out the other fruit you mentioned is just the one piece term. Not a real fruit. Not sure if that should implicate the fruit tag. But I agree with star_fruit -> fruit.
Updated
BUR #20168 has been rejected.
create implication chili_pepper -> fruit
Turns out chili pepper was missing from the fruit tag as well. They are both described as a fruit in the wiki AND fruits under botanical classification. Seems appropriate. Did you know botanically watermelons are berries?
War6t2 said:
BUR #20168 has been rejected.
create implication chili_pepper -> fruit
Did you know botanically watermelons are berries?
I think this is exactly why we shouldn't implicate chili_pepper to fruit just like we shouldn't implicate watermelon to berry. Sure it's botanically correct, but I doubt someone searching for berry wants to see watermelons? Same for chili pepper/fruit.
Astolfo said:
I think this is exactly why we shouldn't implicate chili_pepper to fruit just like we shouldn't implicate watermelon to berry. Sure it's botanically correct, but I doubt someone searching for berry wants to see watermelons? Same for chili pepper/fruit.
You can't compare the two. I mentioned the watermelon fun fact BECAUSE it's so different to what most people call berries. The word "fruit" is much broader in everyday speech and chili peppers don't differ nearly as much. Chili pepper results under fruit would be a lot more relevant to the person browsing than watermelon under berries. Unless the average person would consider chili peppers a vegetable? If we can have fictional fruit imply fruit we can definitely have chili peppers.
I'm not just latching on to botany here, chilis and bananas are both technically berries, but they shouldn't imply "berry" because they are not what people are looking for. Most people just consider "berry" to be small fruits. Chili peppers aren't nearly as different from the everyday use of "fruit" as they are to the everyday use of "berry".
(Side note, the wording here makes it sound like I'm getting really worked up over fruit. I just wanted to point out that isn't the case, I'm just trying to specific)
Even the wiki for the fruit tag goes as follows:
Any sweet, edible part of a plant that resembles seed-bearing fruit. An apple for example.
Tag can cover all types of fruit when there is an abundance of individual fruit in the image.
and the chili pepper entry
A very spicy fresh or dried fruit. Comes in a variety of colors, red being the most known.
For a bell pepper that is colored red, see red pepper.
Used in antojitos and many Mexican recipes.
Also for anyone curious for shits and giggles about what is and isn't a berry botanically: Spoiler alert strawberries are not berries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit#Berries
War6t2 said:
-snip-
Yeah I get your point, but what I mean is that just like people probably wouldn't expect watermelons to appear when searching for berries, I doubt they'd expect chili peppers when searching for fruits?
It's botanically correct, but I think in the head of most people the chili pepper is a vegetable more so than a fruit - same with the bell pepper for example. Botanically they are fruits, but "culinarily" and in the head of most people they're more so considered vegetables, I suppose because they are most usually used in savoury recipes and etc etc.
This conversation reminds me of the time someone attempted to imply tomato to berry a while back, which fell through because while that is botanically correct, it would have polluted the berry tag with tomatoes as opposed to things commonly thought of as berries like blueberries. While people do argue over whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable (or so it went), most people are not going to know a tomato is a berry, and the end result would've been a confusing implication that is extremely unhelpful to anyone searching for berries.
Implicating chili pepper to fruit would have the exact same outcome, I reckon. General rule of thumb: if it isn't commonly thought of as a fruit, it might just be best to leave it alone. The key here behind implications, as it were in this case, is searchability. Implicating chili pepper to fruit would be extremely unhelpful to those searching in the latter tag, and be confusing to those looking through the former. I know I would've been, before having learned in this thread that chili peppers are classified as fruit.
(Also, and this is completely off-topic...Why are we arguing over chili peppers being treated as fruit on the thread to implicate star-shaped food to stuff? Feels like this thread took an odd swerve there.)
Updated
create implication starfruit -> star-shaped_food
The starfruit only has star shaped when cut in cross-section. The fruit itself doesn't have star shaped: post #6204719 post #2295645.
create implication paopu_fruit -> starfruit
Even though paopu fruit is based off starfruit, I don't think they actually look alike.
I’m not completely against it, but I prefer keeping them separated with a note in the wiki about its origin than group them together. When searching for carambola I would not expect paopu fruit to pop into the result.
yelite said:
The starfruit only has star shaped when cut in cross-section. The fruit itself doesn't have star shaped: post #6204719 post #2295645.
You are right. However, the vast majority of posts in that small tag do feature that star-shaped cross-section slice people typically think of with starfruit. I still feel comfortable implicating starfruit to star-shaped food, but hm...
Even though paopu fruit is based off starfruit, I don't think they actually look alike.
I’m not completely against it, but I prefer keeping them separated with a note in the wiki about its origin than group them together. When searching for carambola I would not expect paopu fruit to pop into the result.
That's understandable. Maybe instead of implicating starfruit to star-shaped food, we can create a star-shaped fruit tag for these and tag if it is carambola or paopu fruit or what have you? That could solve this and account for the edge cases.
Astolfo said:
Yeah I get your point, but what I mean is that just like people probably wouldn't expect watermelons to appear when searching for berries, I doubt they'd expect chili peppers when searching for fruits?
It's botanically correct, but I think in the head of most people the chili pepper is a vegetable more so than a fruit - same with the bell pepper for example. Botanically they are fruits, but "culinarily" and in the head of most people they're more so considered vegetables, I suppose because they are most usually used in savoury recipes and etc etc.
Maiden_in_Orange said:
This conversation reminds me of the time someone attempted to imply tomato to berry a while back, which fell through because while that is botanically correct, it would have polluted the berry tag with tomatoes as opposed to things commonly thought of as berries like blueberries. While people do argue over whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable (or so it went), most people are not going to know a tomato is a berry, and the end result would've been a confusing implication that is extremely unhelpful to anyone searching for berries.
Implicating chili pepper to fruit would have the exact same outcome, I reckon. General rule of thumb: if it isn't commonly thought of as a fruit, it might just be best to leave it alone. The key here behind implications, as it were in this case, is searchability. Implicating chili pepper to fruit would be extremely unhelpful to those searching in the latter tag, and be confusing to those looking through the former. I know I would've been, before having learned in this thread that chili peppers are classified as fruit.
(Also, and this is completely off-topic...Why are we arguing over chili peppers being treated as fruit on the thread to implicate star-shaped food to stuff? Feels like this thread took an odd swerve there.)
People don't consider chili peppers fruits in everyday speech? I honestly did not know. I thought it was only bell peppers considered vegetables in everyday speech with chili peppers being more ambiguous.
Implicating paopu fruit to star-shaped food sound good to me.
At the moment, manually tag star-shaped food tag to starfruit slice posts is enough imo.
We can create starfruit slice tag later and implicating it to starfruit and star-shaped food when the tag count grown more.
I don't think star-shaped fruit tag have any use for now.
War6t2 said:
People don't consider chili peppers fruits in everyday speech? I honestly did not know. I thought it was only bell peppers considered vegetables in everyday speech with chili peppers being more ambiguous.
First time I heard of them being considered fruits. I've personally always considered them to be a type of spice, but I do believe the common consensus amongst people was vegetable, similar to bell peppers. I cannot say I'm surprised, considering how weird taxonomy can get (for example, scorpions are classified as arachnids, aka spiders).
Even so, I personally think tagging according to precise science like this just isn't great for searchability. And I think many others would agree with me. Speaking of fruit...
yelite said:
Implicating paopu fruit to star-shaped food sound good to me.
At the moment, manually tag star-shaped food tag to starfruit slice posts is enough imo.
We can create starfruit slice tag later and implicating it to starfruit and star-shaped food when the tag count grown more.I don't think star-shaped fruit tag have any use for now.
Sounds good. I'll go ahead and run a counter BUR to that proposal then. Much less likely to get weird edge cases like this that way. Though I'm still going to try implicating starfruit to fruit, because it being a small tag meant it never got implicated when it should have.
BUR #20181 has been rejected.
create implication paopu_fruit -> star-shaped_food
create implication starfruit -> fruit
yelite's counterproposal as discussed for forum #255341, as well as my attempt to go ahead and get starfruit implicated to fruit.
The bulk update request #20168 (forum #255407) has been rejected by @evazion.
War6t2 said:
BUR #20168 has been rejected.
create implication chili_pepper -> fruit
Turns out chili pepper was missing from the fruit tag as well. They are both described as a fruit in the wiki AND fruits under botanical classification. Seems appropriate. Did you know botanically watermelons are berries?
For plants and animals we use layman classifications rather than scientific classifications.
