Topic: voluptuous_* -> voluptuous implication

The bulk update request #13481 is pending approval.

create implication voluptuous_anthro (13762) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_gynomorph (2808) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_intersex (2477) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_humanoid (971) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_male (582) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_human (125) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_herm (78) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_alien (57) -> voluptuous (96479)
create implication voluptuous_feral (48) -> voluptuous (96479)

Reason: Presently, none of the voluptuous_* tags actually imply the broader voluptuous tag. Searching "voluptuous_* -voluptuous" turns up 28 pages of results. This can't be right.

timeswordsman said:
create implication voluptuous_alien (57) -> voluptuous (95912)

Should be invalidated/aliased away. "Alien" is too generic of a "species" to get a tag like this, IMO.

timeswordsman said:
create implication voluptuous_gynomorph (2795) -> voluptuous (95912)
[...]
create implication voluptuous_herm (77) -> voluptuous (95912)

These should implicate voluptuous_intersex, which will implicate voluptuous, making these implications redundant. Along with the missing voluptuous_andromorph.

These should also implicate what they are (e.g. imply voluptuous_anthro -> anthro).

Related or duplicate BURs:
topic #35848
topic #42934
topic #47579

As with other unnecessary redundant combination tags, all of these should be aliased to 'voluptuous'.

watsit said:
Related or duplicate BURs:
topic #35848
topic #42934
topic #47579

People have asked for these implications as far back as three years ago? When I submit tag implication/alias requests individually they're usually accepted or rejected within a few days. Maybe the BUR system isn't worth using...

timeswordsman said:
People have asked for these implications as far back as three years ago? When I submit tag implication/alias requests individually they're usually accepted or rejected within a few days. Maybe the BUR system isn't worth using...

At any given time there's at most 1 person handling BURs, it's usually zero because of how tedious handing BURs is
That doesn't make the system not worth using, that makes the current state of how the system is managed an issue

Nothing can really be done about that though because a single BUR can bring the site to its knees in a matter of moments, so it cannot be entrusted to non-admins without heavy restrictions for which no system exists yet

donovan_dmc said:
At any given time there's at most 1 person handling BURs, it's usually zero because of how tedious handing BURs is
That doesn't make the system not worth using, that makes the current state of how the system is managed an issue

Nothing can really be done about that though because a single BUR can bring the site to its knees in a matter of moments, so it cannot be entrusted to non-admins without heavy restrictions for which no system exists yet

I see. That's a real shame, but understandable. If BURs are that hazardous, I guess for relatively small changes like this it would be better to submit them as individual requests gradually so it doesn't prompt someone to ask why you didn't use a BUR.