The bulk update request #3809 is active.

create alias pullup (0) -> pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0)
create alias pullups (0) -> pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0)
create alias pull-up (0) -> pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0)
create alias pull-ups (0) -> pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0)
create alias pull_up (0) -> pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0)
create alias pull_ups (0) -> pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0)
change category pull-ups_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid
create implication pull-ups_(diaper) (464) -> diaper (25495)
create implication pull-up_(exercise) (147) -> exercise (10569)

Reason: This tag is a farce in multiple overlapping ways.

• Nobody can agree on whether it should be pluralised.
• Nobody can agree on whether it should have a space, a hyphen, or neither.
• Most importantly, nobody can agree on whether it should be tagged for pull-ups_(diaper) or pull-up_(exercise).

Those latter two tags already exist, and the diaper one is already very well populated. The base tags are a seemingly random mix of two very different concepts. Despite the suffixed tag being singular, the two tags with the most exercise content seem to be pullups and pull_ups.

I suspect the ongoing mixup here and the controversial nature of diaper content might be contributing to how hard it is to find pictures of that particular form of exercise on this site. For example, here's an otherwise well-tagged image that I found after 30 seconds on the second page of workout -weightlifting without even having to turn off my blacklist.

Also added the obvious (but currently missing) implications to both suffixed tags, in the hope that it might make them easier to spot for anyone trying to find the correct tag on related wiki pages.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3809 (forum #353469) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

Ok, I cleaned up some of the tags, but, the pull-ups wiki states that its a brand, but its also a generic term, are we tagging only the brand when its explicitly stated? or are we using it as a generic term?

Update:

finished Changed all posts... no pun intended.

cutefox123 said:
Ok, I cleaned up some of the tags, but, the pull-ups wiki states that its a brand, but its also a generic term, are we tagging only the brand when its explicitly stated? or are we using it as a generic term?

I don't think anybody has ever used it to tag the brand. In fact it might be a good idea to change its category to general.

Even if we did have a tag for a specific brand label I doubt it would see much use. Diaper fetishists don't seem to fetishise labels as much as e.g. car fetishists do.

I would think generic, in the same way we call non-stick pans 'teflon' pans regardless of Dupont affiliation.

As for exercise I feel like using "chin_up" would avoid confusion, even if palms are facing in and it's technically a pull up.

The bulk update request #3836 is active.

change category pull-ups_(diaper) (464) -> general

Reason: For tagging purposes, its used as a generic term.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3836 (forum #353580) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

idontlikethisgame said:
I would think generic, in the same way we call non-stick pans 'teflon' pans regardless of Dupont affiliation.

As for exercise I feel like using "chin_up" would avoid confusion, even if palms are facing in and it's technically a pull up.

chin up is a tag with 11 posts, but it will need to be disambiguated anyways, with the excersise post #3051619, and a character literally moving their chin up post #2686405

cutefox123 said:
chin up is a tag with 11 posts, but it will need to be disambiguated anyways, with the excersise post #3051619, and a character literally moving their chin up post #2686405

I would tag the exercise as chin-up_(exercise), once someone writes chin_up and see the other option, they will probably choose that one.
Also matches the standard of the pull-up_(exercise) tag

...Though I think having chin_up and chin-up might cause mistags since once doesn't show the other, a pitty since it sounds gramatically correct.

The bulk update request #3809 (forum #353469) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3836 (forum #353580) has been approved by @gattonero2001.