Implicating grass → plant
Link to implication

Reason:

It is a type of plant, and the plant wiki says "Used for any type of plant".

Related forum threads:

• forum #215748.
• forum #215749.
• forum #215750.

EDIT: The tag implication grass -> plant (forum #215746) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

*says

O16 said:
*says

There's an "Edit" button on your post... You can use that to add more related implications (ie, the collection of "Plant" implications) as well (Generally avoid putting the extras in the initial post, though)

It's not necessary, but it does save time typing in multiple implication suggestions.

-1 grass is not paint

Tuvalu said:
-1 grass is not paint

He said plant, not paint.

this is pretty pedantic

Knotty_Curls said:
this is pretty pedantic

I mean, for completeness, I'd say that it's not really, but like tuvalu was probably trying to say (excuse me if it seems like I'm trying to put words in their mouth), grass is not a plant.

Overall, -1 for me

Knotty_Curls said:
this is pretty pedantic

-Anonymous- said:
I mean, for completeness, I'd say that it's not really, but like tuvalu was probably trying to say (excuse me if it seems like I'm trying to put words in their mouth), grass is not a plant.

Overall, -1 for me

The "plant" tag theoretically is useful if I want (or not) to see vegetation. But if the types of vegetation does not imply in this tag, it would become less and less useful.

Grass, trees, cacti, flowers, moss, lilypads and shrubs clearly are plants (but about seaweed is more complicated).

is a good umbrella tag.

Considering aliasing `vegetation` -> `plant`.

Knotty_Curls said:
Considering aliasing `vegetation` -> `plant`.

Go for it.

Implicating nature -> plant might also work. It's not really taggable if there's no plants.

Genjar said:
Go for it.

Implicating nature -> plant might also work. It's not really taggable if there's no plants.

A quick search yielded results like beaches and other landscapes which may not always have plants. Perhaps it's true by wiki definition, and other tags such as `beach` and `landscape` can cover those exceptions, but for now it's gonna be a no-go on that one.

`vegetation` -> `plant` alias is green

Genjar said:
Implicating nature -> plant might also work. It's not really taggable if there's no plants.

When I started tagging, was caught off guard by the fact of 'nature' only be used to environments with vegetation. Initially I thought it really referred to natural environments (including but not limited to: coral reefs, sandy deserts, mountains, ocean bed, canyons, caves, frozen plains etc.). I admit that hadn't the habit of reading wikis yet, but this doesn't change the fact of this tag be a bit misleading,

In my opinion, if you're discussing aliases and implications, it's good to not read the wiki.

Think like a clueless tagger. How would somebody with no idea about e621's wiki tag a given image?

Bump

There's no vote button for me. A similar issue happened to @faucet and @Watsit in a different topic.

gattonero2001 said:
Bump

There's no vote button for me. A similar issue happened to @faucet and @Watsit in a different topic.

I voted on that prior topic, but there's no button here for me either.

The tag implication grass -> plant (forum #215746) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The tag implication grass -> plant (forum #215746) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

so nice they did it twice