implicate spoken tags to speech_bubble

BUR #40780 has been rejected.

create implication speech_stab -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_anger_vein -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_blush -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_ellipsis -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_exclamation_mark -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_food -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_heart -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_interrobang -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_musical_note -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_question_mark -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_squiggle -> speech_bubble
create implication spoken_sweatdrop -> speech_bubble

A large set of implications which will undoubtedly add speech bubbles where they shouldn't be, I justify this with the overwhelming amount of posts with untagged speech bubbles that date back (almost) 20 years.

I've read this thread and the speech_bubble tag will be heavily inflated but it's a lot more accurate than what we have now and it'll be useful to have all of this in one spot where it can just be made into a tag group or when it's gardened.

There are instances of spoken heart and spoken musical note in text, but not in speech bubbles.

hasu_no_tokimeki said:

There are instances of spoken heart and spoken musical note in text, but not in speech bubbles.

I'm pretty comfortable saying at very least there'd be 10:1 speech bubbles not tagged in those categories. What should we do instead?

post #6677057 is spoken_heart, but not speech_bubble. This depiction can be used for any of these spoken_x tags; none of them should be implied.

AngryZapdos said:

post #6677057 is spoken_heart, but not speech_bubble. This depiction can be used for any of these spoken_x tags; none of them should be implied.

I wouldn't tag that with spoken heart, but that's me.

AngryZapdos said:

post #6677057 is spoken_heart, but not speech_bubble. This depiction can be used for any of these spoken_x tags; none of them should be implied.

I mostly agree but there is a vast majority of the spoken_* tags that are in speech bubbles. My point with all of this is you're being more accurate than inaccurate by this implication and it can be undone later when a better consensus is reached.

post #1851 Good example of why this isn't a good idea, see look, no speech bubble.

scydrew said:

I mostly agree but there is a vast majority of the spoken_* tags that are in speech bubbles. My point with all of this is you're being more accurate than inaccurate by this implication and it can be undone later when a better consensus is reached.

That's not how this works. If the implication is even slightly inaccurate, it won't work as an implication. It will instead have to be maintained manually.

post #8177625 is closer to what I envision as spoken_x but not speech_bubble imo. I wouldn't tag spoken_heart for a paragraph of dialogue like that Suigintou, but wiki says otherwise so .

hasu_no_tokimeki said:

That's not how this works. If the implication is even slightly inaccurate, it won't work as an implication. It will instead have to be maintained manually.

Ah, I'm sorry I wasn't aware.

The bulk update request #40780 (forum #350496) has been rejected by @scydrew.