The bulk update request #586 is active.

remove alias 2_penises (20854) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias 2_penis (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias 2-penis (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias 2-penises (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias double_cock (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias double_penis (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias doublecock (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias doublepenis (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias two_penis (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias two_penises (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias two-penis (0) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove alias two-penises (0) -> multi_penis (26788)

Reason: Removing the alias 2_penises -> multi_penis to establish 2_penises as it's own separate tag. Un-aliasing several variations of 2_penises so that they can subsequently be aliased to 2_penises in another BUR.

EDIT: The bulk update request #586 (forum #302903) has been approved by @Millcore.

I'm confused why all variants of 2_penises were aliased to multi_penis specifically, but diphallism is left entirely unrelated to any of these aliases. Unless I'm misunderstanding something, isn't diphallism basically just 2_penises?

diphallism is already pretty established and consistent. As Vulkalu said, it means the same thing as 2_penises, so I believe that it should be the "final destination" of the tags in the sequel to this BUR. Besides, being already divided into vertical and horizontal variants really sells it to me.

I'm fine with this, as long as the "Tags for another BUR" agrees whether it should be 2_penis or 2_penises.

animperfectpatsy said:
I'm fine with this, as long as the "Tags for another BUR" agrees whether it should be 2_penis or 2_penises.

I hadn't notice that error I've made, I'll correct that right now.

The bulk update request #586 (forum #302903) has been approved by @Millcore.

Before I make the subsequent BUR, I'm wondering whether 2_penises or diphallism should be used for "a character that has two penises"?

While diphallism has a lot of posts tagged with it (as well as the two implicated subtags of diphallism), the 2_penises tag would match better with the rest of the [number]_penises tags.

I vote for diphallism, because it is already established and has valid active tag relationships.

It is an acceptable exception to the *_penises rule because characters with three or more penises cannot be physically categorized as easily as characters with two penises.

I'd also vote diphallism, largely because it'd be much simpler to just alias everything to that. Since, as previously pointed out, it already has tag relations set up, subtags, as well as a wiki.

I don't see why we should have special exceptions for something like this when we have clear counting of most other body parts. Updating the relationships, subtags and wiki shouldn't be a huge endeavor.

shadowstones said:
I don't see why we should have special exceptions for something like this when we have clear counting of most other body parts. Updating the relationships, subtags and wiki shouldn't be a huge endeavor.

Yeah, if that's the only issue I can submit some additional BURs to include those alias/implication removals. And those wikis would mostly be an easy copy-paste.

shadowstones said:
...

d.d.m. said:
...

Yeah, that's fair. I just didn't think it overly mattered in this case. If diphallism is getting aliased to 2_penises, then, will the horizontal/vertical subtags still keep their names?

The bulk update request #676 is active.

remove alias diphallactic (0) -> diphallism (5273)
remove alias diphallia (0) -> diphallism (5273)
remove alias diphallic (0) -> diphallism (5273)
remove alias diphalism (0) -> diphallism (5273)
remove alias diphalia (0) -> diphallism (5273)
remove implication diphallism (5273) -> multi_penis (26788)
remove implication horizontal_diphallism (2772) -> diphallism (5273)
remove implication vertical_diphallism (1992) -> diphallism (5273)
create alias 2_penis (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias 2-penis (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias 2-penises (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias double_cock (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias double_penis (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias doublecock (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias doublepenis (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias two_penis (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias two_penises (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias two-penis (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create alias two-penises (0) -> 2_penises (20854)
create implication 2_penises (20854) -> multi_penis (26788)

Reason: Subsequent BUR for 2_penises.

• This also includes un-aliases and un-implications that are designed to alias diphallism -> 2_penises in a subsequent BUR, since both tags are used for the same thing and 2_penises would match better with the format of other [number]_penis tags. Let me know if folks prefer utilizing diphallism or 2_penises. I can edit this BUR if folks would prefer keeping diphallism instead of 2_penises (the horizontal_diphallism and vertical_diphallism tags will largely remain unaltered).

EDIT: The bulk update request #676 (forum #304698) has been approved by @Millcore.

The bulk update request #676 (forum #304698) has been approved by @Millcore.