Reason: the difference is very slight and hard to notice, and pretty much all of ;p can be found with wink :p already. Perhaps a mass edit to ensure that it holds before aliasing is in order.
Updated by juunigatsu no usagi
Posted under General
It'd be nice if a tag could be made to alias more than one tag then, because ;p is just as valid then aliased to wink.
Anyways, just to be an oppositionist about everything (because I have to, 'cause kittens explode if I don't) if you alias ;p then you might as well alias things like striped_thighhighs to thighhighs then. The logic pretty much is the same. You can find striped thighhighs using a thighhigh striped search. Sure there is more noise in that search than wink :p, but similarly you can have more than one character in an image with one winking and one sticking their tongue (post #556425). So after the alias if you wish to find an image with one character winking and one character sticking their tongue out, it's be a nice dig through the images to find it.
Another thing to wonderfully note, is that there is right now almost no overlap between the images tagged ;p and the images tagged wink :p, thus combining them you would have an image population of around 400 images (less depending on how many images aren't just one character with both traits), but 400 would be a very nice sized population for tag to stand on it's own.
if you alias ;p then you might as well alias things like striped_thighhighs to thighhighs then. The logic pretty much is the same. You can find striped thighhighs using a thighhigh striped search.
And I advocate this approach in general. Multi-concept tags don't get a lot of support from me. However striped_thighhighs is just too massive to remove, so I won't. Anyway, I'm calling that a separate issue, let's focus just on this tag for now.
There are reasonable arguments in favor of aliasing this or not aliasing this, and like NWF said it's be neat if you could alias something to multiple tags - it'd be like an invisible implication, where you put x and get y and z but x isn't visible. Though when multiple arguments seem equally valid I tend to give slightly incumbent advantage to the status quo. We could just implicate ;p to wink and :p. That results in some ;p clutter but as mentioned, we can't alias to multiple.
if you alias ;p then you might as well alias things like striped_thighhighs to thighhighs then. The logic pretty much is the same. You can find striped thighhighs using a thighhigh striped search.
Unfortunately this isn't true, as shown by 3dbooru (we only use striped and not the subsequent striped_thighhighs etc.) Striped panties and solid thighhighs would show up. It bugs the shit out of me too but there's no reasonable way to handle it.
For this implicating around is fine but I wouldn't argue against an alias.
Yes, the inability to alias into multiple tags is a good argument against my original request. I'm not concerned about the searches where :p + wink != ;p, since that's a small proportion of matching posts, but I am concerned about the fact that someone tagging a new picture with ;p would result in it morphing into either :p or wink, but not both, which is a significant information loss. I think we're pushing the limits of the existing tag infrastructure enough to warrant querying albert about the feasibility of adding more expressive tag relationships to the system.