[REJECTED] One-piece thong

create implication thong_one-piece_swimsuit -> one-piece_thong
create implication thong_one-piece_swimsuit -> one-piece_swimsuit
create implication thong_one-piece_swimsuit -> swimsuit

Link to request

There are two tags for the same (more or less) thing: thong_one-piece_swimsuit and one-piece_thong. The first one doesn't have any description, while second one states that it's related either to swimsuit or to leotard. And thong_one-piece_swimsuit doesn't implicate any generic or special swimsuit tags.

One needs some clarification here. Something like I've proposed or anything more suitable.

The bulk update request #1225 has been rejected.

I removed create implication thong_one-piece_swimsuit -> swimsuit from the above implication as it was superfluous (one-piece_swimsuit already implicates swimsuit).

Having said that, I'm not sure about the veracity of the one-piece_thong tag when we already have thong leotard and thong_one-piece_swimsuit.

As a side note, I'm going to submit an issue on GitHub so that superfluous implications like the above are not allowed.

Edit:

Created issue #3200.

• The additional implication to swimsuit is redundant, as one-piece_swimsuit already implicates swimsuit.
• Only 27 posts isn't really enough to justify the overhead of an implication. Manual tagging or a tag script makes more sense at this scale.
• Thong_one-piece_swimsuit serves no apparent purpose that can't be accomplished with existing tags. All it does is replicate a one-piece_thong one-piece_swimsuit search.

In light of the last point, I suggest instead that we remove thong_one-piece_swimsuit altogether. We have a long-standing policy of eliminating combination tags that do nothing other tags can't already do, and that certainly seems to be the case here.

Replaced thong_one-piece_swimsuit with one-piece_thong one-piece_swimsuit.

The bulk update request #1225 has been rejected.