The tag alias #63922 fetal_movement -> unborn_kicking has been rejected.

Reason: Fetal_movement is a redundant tag. The explanation on the wiki page for unborn_kicking shows that it should already cover any situations where you'd need to use a fetal_movement tag.

EDIT: The tag alias fetal_movement -> unborn_kicking (forum #376212) has been rejected by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #5530 has been rejected.

create implication unborn_kicking (1139) -> pregnant (39981)

Reason: this requires a character to be visibly pregnant

EDIT: The bulk update request #5530 (forum #376231) has been rejected by @slyroon.

cloudpie said:
The bulk update request #5530 has been rejected.

create implication unborn_kicking (1139) -> pregnant (39981)

Reason: this requires a character to be visibly pregnant

What if the picture only consists of the inside of the pregnant character, showing only the unborn without showing the outside, would that tag still be applicable?

m3g4p0n1 said:
What if the picture only consists of the inside of the pregnant character, showing only the unborn without showing the outside, would that tag still be applicable?

Ooh... I actually don't know tbh. Good question

The bulk update request #5530 (forum #376231) has been rejected by @slyroon.

The tag alias fetal_movement -> unborn_kicking (forum #376212) has been rejected by @slyroon.

recursion said:
The tag alias #63922 fetal_movement -> unborn_kicking has been rejected.

Reason: Fetal_movement is a redundant tag. The explanation on the wiki page for unborn_kicking shows that it should already cover any situations where you'd need to use a fetal_movement tag.

EDIT: The tag alias fetal_movement -> unborn_kicking (forum #376212) has been rejected by @slyroon.

Huh, I wonder what's with the opposition to the alias. They definitely seem pretty similar.