Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
Implicating pokémon_(species) → pokémon
Link to implication
Currently the species tag doesn't imply it, which can occasionally lead to posts with the species tag not being tagged with the copyright tag, such as various alolan forms which lack pokemon implications and newer species (the newly publicly revealed zeraora for example)
With this implication, this occasional mistake is fixed.
Updated by MyNameIsOver20charac
+1, it would greatly help implications of the pokemon tags. To me, it seems like a simpler implication chain as well:
\whatever_pokemon_species -> pokémon_(species) -> pokémon
As compared to:
\whatever_pokemon_species -> pokémon_(species) & pokémon
Hence each \whatever_pokemon_species would have one implication with another automatic implication, as opposed to having two implications.
Updated by anonymous
D.D.M. said:
+1, it would greatly help implications of the pokemon tags. To me, it seems like a simpler implication chain as well:\whatever_pokemon_species -> pokémon_(species) -> pokémon
As compared to:
\whatever_pokemon_species -> pokémon_(species) & pokémon
Hence each \whatever_pokemon_species would have one implication with another automatic implication, as opposed to having two implications.
Agreed!
Updated by anonymous
D.D.M. said:
+1, it would greatly help implications of the pokemon tags. To me, it seems like a simpler implication chain as well:\whatever_pokemon_species -> pokémon_(species) -> pokémon
As compared to:
\whatever_pokemon_species -> pokémon_(species) & pokémon
Hence each \whatever_pokemon_species would have one implication with another automatic implication, as opposed to having two implications.
Yes +1, should reduce the number of necessary implications with a ton.
Updated by anonymous
