nuke no_headwear

BUR #11527 has been rejected.

deprecate no_headwear
mass update no_hat or no_bandana or no_helmet -> -no_headwear

Over 90% overlap with no hat, meaning it wouldn't even be eligible for an implication today. But it's even worse than it first seems, because there are ~1900 posts under no_headwear -no_hat -no_helmet -no_bandana, so the actual overlap is even higher. no bandana and no helmet only have 412 posts in total, meaning they combined comprise only 1.4% of no headwear. If you want one of those you've be better off searching for the specific tag.

Making it a deprecate + mass update instead of an actual nuke because of the aforementioned 1900 posts without a more specific tag.

I don't really understand the point of this. no_headwear makes sense in that it is tagging the concept that a piece of headwear regularly worn on their head isn't there, so that seems like a valid tag. Then we have these specialized tags to tag what specific headwear isn't there, but why do we have to know specifically which headwear isn't there?

I don't feel particularly strongly about going either way. I only picked this route because all the bullshit *wear tags have been very tiresome lately so it was what I thought of first. Either way, how it is now is the worst of both worlds so they shouldn't both exist.

BUR #11542 has been approved by @NWF_Renim.

create alias no_hat -> no_headwear
create alias no_bandana -> no_headwear
create alias no_helmet -> no_headwear

If a character is not wearing their iconic headwear, Does it even matter which piece was it in the first place? it's not even on the image.

With the talulah solution we remove a tag from the ever bloated sea of blue that is the gentag list. Yet we are creating a problem of granularity with the 90% / 5% / 5% nature of the solution.

With this one both birds are dead

testingmmmmm said:

If a character is not wearing their iconic headwear, Does it even matter which piece was it in the first place? it's not even on the image

We made the same conclusion in topic #20898 for no neckwear. Similarly, we use no pants for the lack of any sort of bottomwear, no shoes for lack of footwear, and no panties for lack of (female) underwear. It's contradictory with "tag what you see" to expect users to tag things you can't actually see. Not everyone is gonna know that character X normally wears a bandana.

The bulk update request #11527 (forum #218045) has been rejected by @Talulah.

Rejecting in favor of the other one then.

The bulk update request #11542 (forum #218114) has been approved by @NWF_Renim.