The tag implication #51414 larger_cub -> larger_young has been rejected.

Reason: Since cub implies young, larger_cub should imply larger_young.

EDIT: The tag implication larger_cub -> larger_young (forum #371632) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

Should probably be aliased. Cub is uniquely only for anthros/ferals/taurs, where there isn't a tag for only human(oid) young or for other ages, making it stick out like a sore thumb.

If cub is aliased to young, then yes your suggestion is correct. With this thread I am making it consistent with cub.

aaronfranke said:
If cub is aliased to young, then yes your suggestion is correct. With this thread I am making it consistent with cub.

He meant we dont need [adjective]_cub tag like we don't need [adjective]_loli, but regardless I don't like cub as a tag and want it aliased to young, so that's also fine by me.

aaronfranke said:
If cub is aliased to young, then yes your suggestion is correct. With this thread I am making it consistent with cub.

cub relates only to a particular subset of young characters, like how girly relates to a subset of particular male-bodied characters. The girly tag itself is expected to be tagged with the *male* tags without needing a slew of *girly* tags to match all the *male* tags, so cub would be tagged itself alongside the *young* tags without needing a slew of *cub* tags to match all the *young* tags.

Is there any progress on fully replacing cub with young? We already have cub_on_cub -> young_on_young, but we don't yet have cub -> young.

I think we should have cub which implicates young to indicate a a/f/t youngling, but we don't need distinct cub_*/*_cub tags. The generic young_*/*_young tags should suffice to describe the setting, and the cub tag will get you images with a/f/t younglings involved in the described setting.

Also, the benefits of larger_cub over cub larger_young are few.

I agree, I'm not totally sure if cub is necessary but regardless the cub_*/*_cub tags are not needed.

The bulk update request #6029 is active.

create alias larger_cub (3) -> larger_young (318)
create implication larger_young (318) -> young (241050)
create implication larger_young (318) -> size_difference (349838)

Reason: Cub has been aliased, this should be too.

EDIT: The bulk update request #6029 (forum #384053) has been approved by @slyroon.

The tag implication larger_cub -> larger_young (forum #371632) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

donovan_dmc said:
The bulk update request #6029 is active.

create alias larger_cub (3) -> larger_young (318)
create implication larger_young (318) -> young (241050)
create implication larger_young (318) -> size_difference (349838)

Reason: Cub has been aliased, this should be too.

I guess use this checklist?
larger_cub -young
larger_cub -young_feral feral
larger_cub -young_anthro anthro
larger_cub -larger_feral feral
larger_cub -larger_anthro anthro
larger_cub -larger_young <-- Meh, redundant with that alias.

post #2382638 Tags on this are confusing me XD

I know it feels redundant, but why not add aliases for smaller_young aswell?

benjiboyo said:
I know it feels redundant, but why not add aliases for smaller_young aswell?

I'd imagine neither smaller cub or smaller young have ever been used since the default assumption is the younger character would be smaller

donovan_dmc said:
I'd imagine neither smaller cub or smaller young have ever been used since the default assumption is the younger character would be smaller

which is why i said the first part of the sentence... but what of images when it's 2 young characters, but 1's younger and smaller. but if it sounds too niche, i'm whatever bout it.

The bulk update request #6029 (forum #384053) has been approved by @slyroon.