Implicating thoothless → night_fury
Link to implication

Reason:

Night fury is the Thoothless's specie.

Thoothless? I think you mean Toothless.

Against. We don't implicate characters with species because they aren't always drawn as that particular species. (by the way, species is one of the few words ending in S that is both the plural and singular)

However, it would be nice to get an implication of night_fury -> dragon

parasprite said:
Against.

Ain't that a kick in the thead

all character -> species implications are awlays bad. what if someone draws pony version of toohtless? you cant tag that as night fury because its a pony, not a night fury.

Also, "Toothless" just means "Doesn't have teeth." You would want toothless_(httyd), but as the others mentioned, even then it would be a poor idea.
Edit: Apparently the tag hasn't been used like that... Still, since it's something people might actually start tagging, the character should be moved.

Denied for the reasons already stated by others: we don't implicate character tags to --> species tags, because it's the internet where people can draw characters in non-canon ways, including as another species than normal. When that happens, the implication to their canon species would add a false tag, because that character isn't currently their normal species in that image. Having the tag on images it doesn't belong messes up searches, and if it's caused by a bad implication then no one can remove the tag until the implication is changed. So, because character tag to --> species tags implications don't actually work very well, we've learned not to make them implications. The species can just be added manually instead.

furrypickle said:
Denied for the reasons already stated by others: we don't implicate character tags to --> species tags, because it's the internet where people can draw characters in non-canon ways, including as another species than normal. When that happens, the implication to their canon species would add a false tag, because that character isn't currently their normal species in that image. Having the tag on images it doesn't belong messes up searches, and if it's caused by a bad implication then no one can remove the tag until the implication is changed. So, because character tag to --> species tags implications don't actually work very well, we've learned not to make them implications. The species can just be added manually instead.

Just curious, any thoughts on toothless/toothless_(httyd)?

parasprite said:
Just curious, any thoughts on toothless/toothless_(httyd)?

It honestly feels like six of one, half dozen the other. There is a tradeoff when taking a character out of a main tag and into a disambiguated one. It's a little less convenient, etc. But sometimes it's necessary, because the tag has more than one meaning and the tradeoff means that it's better to have things clearly in their own tags and a disambiguated list for them vs having a constant tag mess of everything falling into the main tag just so that searchers can see a few of what they're looking for (mixed in with everything else) but no one able to completely find everything.

In this case though, no tag mess is happening. Technically "toothless" could be used literally for characters without teeth, but it's not currently being used that way. And until it is, there's just no need to disambiguate the two meanings separately. And currently "toothless_(httyd)" seems to be completely empty, so there doesn't even seem to be the need to alias the two in order to consolidate and keep the character in just one tag. So because of all of that, I was thinking just to leave it for now. Keep an eye on it. When it needs addressing someday in the future, then we'll figure out what the best solution is for it then. There's just no benefit to doing it so very far in advance of when it's needed in this case.