Posted under Tags
Is there any reason why holding own hair implies the holding tag, but holding another's hair does not?
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems strange and somewhat contradicts what the wiki says:
...Don't use for holding body parts...
Hair isn't really a body part in the usual sense, but still...
The implication was transferred from aliasing holding hair (topic #26815) which had an implication to holding (forum #112660). It's an Oldbooru thing.
BUR #55815 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
remove implication holding_own_hair -> holding
Okay, then I don't see a reason to keep this implication.
BUR #55975 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
mass update holding_own_hair -holding_severed_hair -> -holding
Most holding tags already imply holding, so this should be fine?
The bulk update request #55815 (forum #421922) has been approved by @nonamethanks.
I would imagine there's a few stand out cases where an object doesn't have a holding tag so it just uses holding alone (i.e. holding_own_hair + holding + tag for object they're holding but no holding_x tag associated with that object). A blanket removal would nick these cases. That being said, in a sea of 17.6K posts, I don't know how you're supposed to be able to reasonably search for those cases. Do we think it's worth stopping the entire removal just for likely a few cases out of some ten thousand posts though? Most likely they can be found through a regular browse/garden and have an appropriate tag added if missing.
There's some posts of holding detached hair in holding_own_hair (cutting_hair or detached_hair or severed_hair), but it doesn't seem we have a holding severed hair tag. There's one post under holding detatched hair strand (misspelled). These will have to be moved to a new tag before approving the above.
BUR #57285 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
create alias holding_severed_hair -> holding_detached_hair
Made this. However I realized we have detached hair too, which is for hair that is naturally detached - or at least it's supposed to be, so if we want to keep them apart (which requires some work and maybe some rename - opened forum #428846), it won't be able to imply either.
Updated by nonamethanks
The bulk update request #57285 (forum #428830) has been approved by @nonamethanks.
nonamethanks said in forum #422672:
BUR #55975 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
mass update holding_own_hair -holding_severed_hair -> -holding
Most holding tags already imply holding, so this should be fine?
I'm gonna approve this, holding has 2M posts and this BUR is like pissing in the ocean anyway. If a holding tag does not imply holding it should be implied, or we could maybe just do automatic implications - though that'd require renaming all our holding_ body part tags... That's just an entirely different mess.
The bulk update request #55975 (forum #422672) has been approved by @nonamethanks.
