The bulk update request #8712 is pending approval.
mass update furry_balls -> fluffy_balls
mass update fuzzy_balls -> fluffy_balls
mass update furry_penis -> fluffy_penis
mass update furry_breasts -> fluffy_breasts
create alias furry_balls (755) -> fluffy_balls (916) # duplicate of alias #59619; has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through BUR
create alias fuzzy_balls (485) -> fluffy_balls (916) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through BUR
create alias furry_penis (119) -> fluffy_penis (74) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through BUR
create alias furry_breasts (12) -> fluffy_breasts (188) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through BUR
Reason: Nearly 2 years ago I made two tag implication requests, one for "fluffy_balls -> furry_balls" and another for "fluffy_penis -> furry_penis," I feel that the issue I saw is valid and still present so I will be offering a (hopefully) better solution and providing more reasoning.
These 3 tag pairs are used in near identical ways, especially the pair of fluffy_balls and furry_balls. Overall these "furry" and "fluffy" tags are used to describe clearly visible fur covering a particular body part, said fur is akin to the fur seen in the "ball_tuft" tag, but with additional fur details (The majority of the body part has fur details instead of just one tuft).
The tag fluffy_balls yields over 750 results (posts), furry_balls yields over 650 results, searching for either (~fluffy_balls ~furry_balls) yields over 1,450 results, and searching for both (fluffy_balls furry_balls) yields less than 50 results. If you look at the pages of just fluffy_balls or just furry_balls there is little to no difference in usage.
On my alias request of furry_penis -> fluffy_penis (https://e621.net/forum_topics/34793), three members of the community and a janitor (https://e621.net/users/266520) agreed that the tags "furry_balls" and "furry_penis" are inferior tags.
_
_
furrin_gok said:
"Furry" is also a term used to describe the majority of characters on the site, it's a bad adjective
maplebytes said:
Yeah I don't know why the tag exists at all, fluffy penis and fluffy balls are the better, more descriptive tags.
dubsthefox said:
I would say furred_penis would be better... but thats aliased to furry_penis this should be removed. unalias furred_penis -> furry_penis
_
_
_
I feel that a bulk update request for those two sets is certainly warranted, but "furry_breasts -> fluffy_breasts" is not as strong I will admit; I feel that this is still justified however.
The tag "fluffy_breasts" yields over 150 results and "furry_breasts" yields a mere 8. (This is partially my doing as I noticed two of the images didn't have the same visible fluff {or any fluff for one of them} the other eight did when it came to the characters' breasts)
Similarly to the two previous tag pairs, these two tags also seem to be used interchangeably, with fluffy_breasts being the commonly used tag.
_
_
_
Overall it seems the "fluffy" variant of these tags seem to be the ones that are used more. (fluffy_penis and furry_penis are an outlier but not by much; furry_penis yields around 150 results {100<x<150} and fluffy penis yields less than 100 results {50<x<100}
{I've been estimating post numbers by page count and my 50 posts per page setting, if there is an easier way to do this I did not find it})
The case of "fluffy_pussy" vs "furry_pussy" is less clear cut as their are less than 50 posts that utilize either and I am not sure if there is a preexisting tag that should replace both of them. If I had to venture a guess both should probably be replaced by the "pubes" tag, but they are not my primary concern with making this request, hence why it is not in it.
If this request is down-voted like my last one I implore whoever may down vote it to provide me with additional reasons and/or opinions on why this request is not up to snuff.|
-
Edit: Fixed grammar and corrected "alias requests" to "implication requests"
Edit 2: I couldn't rip myself from this post and have rereviewed the entries on BURs, I believe update is the correct syntax but I think aliases could potentially be added afterwards; I have edited the BUR appropriately
Updated