Implicating petrification → transformation
Link to implication

Reason:

Petrification's wiki page notes that it's a subset of transformation, so it should imply it. Maybe it specifically imply inanimate transformation? But I'm sure there's some art out there that isn't mobility stripping petrification, so I'd err on the side of caution.

EDIT: The tag implication petrification -> transformation (forum #270121) has been rejected by @NotMeNotYou.

-1
a whole lot of the content in petrification tag is post transformation content, which is separate tag from transformation tag. transformation tag is only for when something is actively transforming, while post transformation is for something that has already transformed

Bumping before this one hits the auto-reject cutoff. TBH I don't really care if it's implied to inanimate_transformation or not, I just want this shit to actually get caught by my blacklist.

Will +/-0 for now, if tags are missing on a number of posts because 2 tags are very similar, but functionally incompatible i.e: "a whole lot of the content in petrification tag is post transformation content, which is separate tag from transformation tag." then I won't support without a change or compromise, just look at mucus -> slime/snail_slime -> slime aliases bs the last thing this site needs is more confusion.
meanwhile I still like the implication request, so it's not a negative. If folks won't tag transformation, while tagging petrification where transformation or in rare cases after_transformation are applicable, I do see the point this request is making and this should be looked into.

wat8548 said:
Bumping before this one hits the auto-reject cutoff. TBH I don't really care if it's implied to inanimate_transformation or not, I just want this shit to actually get caught by my blacklist.

Has that ever crossed your mind you could blacklist petrification separately?

The tag implication petrification -> transformation (forum #270121) has been rejected by @NotMeNotYou.

The bulk update request #6106 is active.

create implication petrification (915) -> inanimate_transformation (3104)

Reason: Nope, not giving up on this one. Petrification is the process, by definition if you can see the process you know it's transformation. If the likes of scat_transformation and food_transformation can be implied to transformation, then so can stone transformation.

EDIT: The bulk update request #6106 (forum #385548) has been approved by @slyroon.

user_22273 said:
-1
a whole lot of the content in petrification tag is post transformation content, which is separate tag from transformation tag.

I think post tranformation should just be petrified

The bulk update request #6106 (forum #385548) has been approved by @slyroon.