I've noticed that a lot of bird species are not implied as bird.

Genjar pointed out to me (forum #134278) that there is still some confusion about the tag "avian" and the tag "bird".

The main issue is to imply or alias bird → avian. See discussions in forum #45706 and forum #127116.

Right now some species of birds are implied as "bird", other as "avian" and a lot of them to none at all.

I think that the best way is to remove all the implication of bird species as "avians" and add them all to "bird" (excluding griffons and other similar creatures.

This way the tags will be clean if it's decided to alias the two words or not.

I've already suggested a bunch of species to be added to "bird", just need to find out how to remove the implications to avian to some of them.

Implicating roadrunner → bird
Link to implication

Implicating duck → bird
Link to implication

Reason: duck is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal duck → avian
Link to implication

Reason: duck is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating falcon → bird
Link to implication

Reason: falcon is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal falcon → avian
Link to implication

Reason: falcon is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating hawk → bird
Link to implication

Reason: hawk is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal hawk → avian
Link to implication

Reason: hawk is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating ostrich → bird
Link to implication

Reason: ostrich is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal ostrich → avian
Link to implication

Reason: ostrich is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating owl → bird
Link to implication

Reason: owl is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal owl → avian
Link to implication

Reason: owl is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating peacock → bird
Link to implication

Reason: peacock is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal peacock → avian
Link to implication

Reason: peacock is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating raven → bird
Link to implication

Reason: raven is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal raven → avian
Link to implication

Reason: raven is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating toucan → bird
Link to implication

Reason: toucan is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implication removal toucan → avian
Link to implication

Reason: toucan is implied directly to avian but it should be implied as a bird that is chained to avian

Implicating seagull → bird
Link to implication

Implicating phoenix → bird
Link to implication

Implicating crane → bird
Link to implication

Implicating goose → bird
Link to implication

Implicating cardinal_(bird) → bird
Link to implication

Implicating woodpecker → bird
Link to implication

Implicating dodo → bird
Link to implication

Implicating sparrow → bird
Link to implication

Implicating stork → bird
Link to implication

Implicating kookaburra → bird
Link to implication

Implicating pigeon → bird
Link to implication

Implicating vulture → bird
Link to implication

This next two implications have some replies, so I'll just post the link:

Tag Implication: penguin -> bird (forum #134278)
Tag Implication: heron -> bird (forum #134316)

Why would we alias Bird to avian? There's non-avian birds.

Implicating canary → bird
Link to implication

Halite said:
Why would we alias Bird to avian? There's non-avian birds.

I'm not discussing if we should alias birds with avian. I'm just saying that is nonsensical for eagle to implicate bird (it's even the example given by the tag impication help)...

Help: Tag Implications
You can have multiple implications for the same predicate. e621 will just add all the matching consequent tags. For example, if we created a eagle → animal implication, then anytime someone tagged a post with eagle it would be expanded to eagle bird animal.

Implications can also be chained together. Instead of eagle → animal we could create a bird → animal implication. The end result would be the same.

... while falcon and hawk implicates avian.

Right now bird implicates avian. Link to implication

For what I read in the posts and online all the birds are considered avian but not all the avians are considered birds.

With this in mind is better to implicate all the bird species to bird and they will naturally be avians by the already established implication

Implicating puffin → bird
Link to implication

Implicating pelican → bird
Link to implication

Implicating cockatoo → bird
Link to implication

blackest_vulture said:
I'm not discussing if we should alias birds with avian. I'm just saying that is nonsensical for eagle to implicate bird (it's even the example given by the tag impication help)...

... while falcon and hawk implicates avian.

Right now bird implicates avian. Link to implication

For what I read in the posts and online all the birds are considered avian but not all the avians are considered birds.

With this in mind is better to implicate all the bird species to bird and they will naturally be avians by the already established implication

I can agree with this. Just like cat < feline < mammal, only this would be pelican < bird < avian. And this way if you wanted to search non-bird avians, you could easily do -bird from the search. It's an organization issue, and I think it makes sense.

furrypickle said:
I can agree with this. Just like cat < feline < mammal, only this would be pelican < bird < avian. And this way if you wanted to search non-bird avians, you could easily do -bird from the search. It's an organization issue, and I think it makes sense.

Non-bird avian is bit of an oxymoron, since avian literally means bird. But I don't see that as a major problem, because it wouldn't be the first set of tags (and terms) that we use contrary to their actual meaning.

So I suppose I'm in favor of keeping them separate, as long as everything gets correctly implicated. Though keeping both still seems a bit redundant to me.