Topic: [APPROVED] imply merfolk, lamia -> split_form

The bulk update request #166 is active.

create implication merfolk (7510) -> split_form (14410)
create implication lamia (5337) -> split_form (14410)

Reason: merfolk and lamia are examples of split_form species

EDIT: The bulk update request #166 (forum #294167) has been approved by @Millcore.

I think it would also be worth adding implications for centaur -> split_form and centaur -> humanoid_taur.

• Centaur is used specifically for the classic human upper half + horse lower half, so it should always be split_form.
• Humanoid_taur is used for whenever the upper half of a taur is human or humanoid, "with minimal or no animal features". The wiki for it even mentions that centaurs belong in that category.
• Not sure if humanoid_taur should also implicate split_form though. I'm not 100% sure on the use of split_form, and if it includes creatures that are mostly split 50/50, but with sprinkled features across either half (such as a humanoid_taur with animal ears), or if it's just strictly 50/50 splits.
• On that topic, there are some merfolk that aren't clean 50/50 splits so I'd actually like to know what the answer is for that.

See also BUR #132 (topic #26902), which already includes the lamia implication, among others.

The bulk update request #166 (forum #294167) has been approved by @Millcore.