There's currently an ear_markings -> facial_markings implication in place. I can't find a rationale for it, and it doesn't make sense to me. Ears shouldn't be considered part of the face.

Here's what I think of as ear_markings:
post #658730

And here's what I think of as facial_markings:
post #957828

+1. Ears are definitely not part of the face.

Something tells me that implication was supposed to be [[eye_markings|eye_markings]] -> facial_markings but was entered wrong.

BlueDingo said:
+1. Ears are definitely not part of the face.

Something tells me that implication was supposed to be [[eye_markings|eye_markings]] -> facial_markings but was entered wrong.

all together a mistake not a typo, since none of the other marking tags including those that do occupy the same body region like chest- and breast- markings are implicated to one another ether.

PS: Just puting it out there, i do regard the ears as a part of face in that ears do play a significant role in facial expression and recognition.

+1.Really, ears don't seem to be part of the face, just extensions of the head, in the same way as antennas.

BlueDingo said:
Something tells me that implication was supposed to be [[eye_markings|eye_markings]] -> facial_markings but was entered wrong.

I agree.

o16 said:
+1.Really, ears don't seem to be part of the face, just extensions of the head, in the same way as antennas.

I agree.

+1 for this! I was very confused when I ran into this.

The bulk update request #1425 is active.

remove implication ear_markings (42326) -> facial_markings (48682)

Reason: See Maxpizzle's explanation above.

Spoilers: Ears are not a part of the face.

We will need another BUR to implicate ear_markings -> head_markings.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1425 (forum #318297) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #1425 (forum #318297) has been approved by @gattonero2001.