The tag implication #45489 white-naped_honeyeater -> passerine has been rejected.

Reason: Add white-naped_honeyeater to the tag implication with passerine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-naped_honeyeater

EDIT: The tag implication white-naped_honeyeater -> passerine (forum #340516) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

The tag implication white-naped_honeyeater -> passerine (forum #340516) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

There are intermediary taxons missing, such as honeyeater, and other species of honeyeater as well

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeyeater

The bulk update request #4131 is active.

create implication lewin's_honeyeater (1) -> honeyeater (8)
create implication white-naped_honeyeater (4) -> honeyeater (8)
create implication honeyeater (8) -> oscine (19051)
create alias meliphagidae (0) -> honeyeater (8)

Reason: Gattonero makes a good point. The white-naped honeyeater (Melithreptus lunatus) is a species of bird of the honeyeater family in the "passerines", an order of birds that is distinguished by the arrangement of the toes on their feet (three forward and one back) which makes perching easier. This BUR sets up the necessary series of implications.

EDIT: The bulk update request #4131 (forum #357326) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #4131 (forum #357326) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

clawstripe said:
create implication white-naped_honeyeater (4) -> honeyeater (5)
create implication honeyeater (5) -> passerine (12812)

There are still some intermediary taxons missing...

All passerines are either oscines or suboscines (with the exception of New Zealand wrens), and that is reflected in the current implication structure.

https://bitwolfy.com/projects/tag_visualizer/?tag=passerine

Honeyeaters (AKA Meliphagidae) are oscines, so we can't just create a direct implication to passerine, because that would be equivalent to lion -> felid instead of lion -> pantherine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passerine#Suborder_Passeri_(oscines_or_songbirds)#

Taxonomy is tricky, so it's natural to slip up, but that's why we have to be extra careful around the subject.

Now, we should avoid creating tags for too many higher level taxons that do not already exist, so having genus distinctions for a family with less than 10 posts is almost certainly unnecessary.

gattonero2001 said:
There are still some intermediary taxons missing...

All passerines are either oscines or suboscines (with the exception of New Zealand wrens), and that is reflected in the current implication structure.
...
Honeyeaters (AKA Meliphagidae) are oscines, so we can't just create a direct implication to passerine, because that would be equivalent to lion -> felid instead of lion -> pantherine.

Well, that was what I was hoping someone could help fill in so I could edit the BUR as necessary, but I guess I don't need to now. :/