Topic: [REJECTED] Specific baby tags

The bulk update request #6129 has been rejected.

create implication baby_feral (1) -> young_feral (24138)
create implication baby_feral (1) -> baby (6664)
create implication baby_anthro (1) -> young_anthro (176736)
create implication baby_anthro (1) -> baby (6664)
create implication baby_taur (0) -> young_taur (257)
create implication baby_taur (0) -> baby (6664)
create implication baby_humanoid (0) -> young_humanoid (4197)
create implication baby_humanoid (0) -> baby (6664)
create implication baby_human (0) -> young_human (2979)
create implication baby_human (0) -> baby (6664)

Reason: For ease of tagging

EDIT: The bulk update request #6129 (forum #385639) has been rejected by @slyroon.

I'm not sure we should go to this level of granularity

faucet said:
I'm not sure we should go to this level of granularity

agreed.

We definitely don't need sub-subtags, that's just a whole mess
We already rejected this same kind of notion for the cub tag when it existed, due to it already being a subtag

The bulk update request #6129 (forum #385639) has been rejected by @slyroon.

We already changed *_on_child to *_on_young and child, for example. The general trend seems to be to go the opposite direction, or to alias them away by manually retagging the unaliased term before applying an alias to the other term.