Tag Implication: vuvuzela -> horn_(instrument)

Implying vuvuzela -> horn_(instrument).
Reason: BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

<instrument>

I'm against this implication on philosophical groundzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Wow, vuvuzelas are considered instrumentzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZ now?

Requesting car_horn and air_horn to be implicated to horn_(instrument) as well.

Why would you request two tags that don't even exist or were you trying to be factious?

It's just a general tag for a horn

Gotta say, this thread is far more amusing than it really should be.

Hehe, I thought I was in the comments for a moment there. The tag's got posts, and the implication is sound, so I say we go for it.

Shinjidude said:
sound

Log said:
Why would you request two tags that don't even exist or were you trying to be factious?

The latter. Sorry, I forget sarcasm doesn't work in text form.

In all seriousness, I did have a point mentioning car_horn and air_horn; I consider them to be as much of an instrument as a vuvuzela: not at all.

Hillside_Moose said: In all seriousness, I did have a point mentioning car_horn and air_horn; I consider them to be as much of an instrument as a vuvuzela: not at all.

Justified vuvu hate aside, I think the vuvu fits out current horn_(instrument) wiki definition.

Done.

Unless people want to call it horn_(object)?

I think the implication to (instrument) works fine, no need for (object). That said...

jxh2154 said:
Justified vuvu hate aside

Oh come on, the vuvuzela is awesome and you know it. My initial complaint was simply about it not being musical (though I discovered later that horn_(instrument) does not require this).

This could be a problem if we ever get pictures of brass horns though.

Edit: Nevermind, it seems we tag these as french_horn.

Hillside_Moose said:
The latter.

Were you really trying to be factious?

Go rag on Log, he's the one that made the error.