The tag implication #40238 cherri_topps -> jurassic_beauties has been approved.

Reason: Most of these are missing the copyright, and I just figured out that I can just do this instead of manually going through and editing everything. Gonna also need the same to be done to the other characters. God this must come off as obsessive, holy shit

[edit: nevermind, makin a BUR lol]

EDIT: The tag implication cherri_topps -> jurassic_beauties (forum #312429) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

What is Jurassic Beauties and who is Cherri Topps? Their wikis are blank, though the watermark being JurassicBeauties.com indicates its some kind of dino porn site. There seems to be some images of Cherri Topps that aren't watermarked or branded with Jurassic Beauties, so would it be appropriate for every instance of her to be tagged with Jurassic Beauties, even when drawn by a third-party unrelated to the site?

watsit said:
What is Jurassic Beauties and who is Cherri Topps? Their wikis are blank, though the watermark being JurassicBeauties.com indicates its some kind of dino porn site. There seems to be some images of Cherri Topps that aren't watermarked or branded with Jurassic Beauties, so would it be appropriate for every instance of her to be tagged with Jurassic Beauties, even when drawn by a third-party unrelated to the site?

"Jurassic Beauties" is the series that FossilizedArts' OCs (including Cherri Topps) are under. I just think it would be nice to have them all organised as such. Not sure how else to reply, apologies, I don't usually use forums.

Maybe this would require a BUR request.

bolognet125 said:
Maybe this would require a BUR request.

A BUR would be your best option. You'd be able to group together several implications/alias and also be able to edit it as necessary.

clawstripe said:
A BUR would be your best option. You'd be able to group together several implications/alias and also be able to edit it as necessary.

How would I go about this? There's some script thing on there that I don't understand.

bolognet125 said:
How would I go about this? There's some script thing on there that I don't understand.

At the top of this page, there's "Request BUR". Click that, and you'll get the BUR page (you seem to have gotten that far already, so I'm just being thorough). Slap in a title, a reason, and if you want it added to this particular thread, put 29996 as the forum topic.

For the script, it's not hard. Hit "Help" under the box which will call up a mini-window with different tag suggestion templates. Select the one you want, copy and paste it in the Script box, then replace the "aaa" with the tag you want to implicate/alias/whatever and the "bbb" with the tag you want "aaa" to imply/alias to/whatever.

Let's pretend there's a Tiina Rex among the Jurassic Beauties. If you wanted to imply her tag to jurassic_beauties, you'd copy

imply aaa -> bbb

and paste it in the Script box, then replace aaa and bbb like so:

imply tiina_rex -> jurassic_beauties

Each implication/alias/whatever will need to be on its own line.

The bulk update request #1049 is active.

create implication brenda_sawruss (59) -> jurassic_beauties (292)
create implication kitti_belle (28) -> jurassic_beauties (292)
create implication staci_st.plates (6) -> jurassic_beauties (292)
create implication tyni (27) -> jurassic_beauties (292)
create implication tyra_reckks (61) -> jurassic_beauties (292)
create implication val_raptyress (24) -> jurassic_beauties (292)
create implication thorne_(jurassic_beauties) (59) -> jurassic_beauties (292)

Reason: listed in topic

EDIT: The bulk update request #1049 (forum #312473) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

Looks good to me, though you can delete that first implication (an advantage of using a BUR) since you already made it at the start of this thread. I was afraid I'd be confusing there, so I didn't mention you didn't need to redo the implication. Sorry about that.

clawstripe said:
Looks good to me, though you can delete that first implication (an advantage of using a BUR) since you already made it at the start of this thread. I was afraid I'd be confusing there, so I didn't mention you didn't need to redo the implication. Sorry about that.

Wait, the one from 4 hours ago or the one in the BUR?

bolognet125 said:
Wait, the one from 4 hours ago or the one in the BUR?

You didn't need to redo the cherri_topps implication in the BUR as you'd already made it earlier to start this thread. Again, sorry for any confusion. Since you've removed the one in the BUR, it should be all good now.

These seem good, but I think that the implication for thorne -> jurassic_beauties should be removed since there are other characters also named 'thorne'. I think it would be better to add the scripts below onto the BUR (this will transfer all of the posts tagged with thorne over to the new tag thorne_(jurassic_beauties), and implicate thorne_(jurassic_beauties) -> jurassic_beauties):
update thorne -> thorne_(jurassic_beauties)
imply thorne_(jurassic_beauties) -> jurassic_beauties

d.d.m. said:
These seem good, but I think that the implication for thorne -> jurassic_beauties should be removed since there are other characters also named 'thorne'. I think it would be better to add the scripts below onto the BUR (this will transfer all of the posts tagged with thorne over to the new tag thorne_(jurassic_beauties), and implicate thorne_(jurassic_beauties) -> jurassic_beauties):
update thorne -> thorne_(jurassic_beauties)
imply thorne_(jurassic_beauties) -> jurassic_beauties

How about now?

Yep, the BUR looks all good now.
post #550378

If the characters are FossilizedArts' OCs which once appeared in the Jurassic Beauties series, I don't think all depictions of them should warrant the Jurassic Beauties tag, particularly those not branded or made for JurassicBeauties.com that the tag seems to be for. Unless I'm misunderstanding how these things relate.

watsit said:
If the characters are FossilizedArts' OCs which once appeared in the Jurassic Beauties series, I don't think all depictions of them should warrant the Jurassic Beauties tag, particularly those not branded or made for JurassicBeauties.com that the tag seems to be for. Unless I'm misunderstanding how these things relate.

Oh, I should have mentioned that FossilizedAart made the JB series as their branding. My bad.

The tag implication cherri_topps -> jurassic_beauties (forum #312429) has been approved by @bitWolfy.