I am probably doing it wrong, even though I asked it in advance, but I'm trying to put multiple tag implication suggestions here without spamming the forum. I didn't put anything in the actual implication thingy, in fear of it turning out wrong. Might the implication suggestions underneath not yet have been submitted and are valid implications, please notify me about it or perhaps take care of it on your own if you want to.

Implying: pink markings -> markings
Implying: purple markings -> markings
Implying: white markings -> markings
Implying: whisker markings -> markings

Some more types of markings are not yet implying markings, but I wasn't sure if those are valid to implicate (toeless (marking), bay (marking), etc.).

I actually meant to just suggest an implication using the implication tool and add the others to the reason box.

No worries though, I made a placeholder for you so it doesn't get lost (link.

HotUnderTheCollar said:
I am probably doing it wrong, even though I asked it in advance, but I'm trying to put multiple tag implication suggestions here without spamming the forum. I didn't put anything in the actual implication thingy, in fear of it turning out wrong.

I've requested multiple implications in a single thread a few times now, like here where I added similar tags to be implicated in the "Reasons" section before posting the suggestion.
You should be fine. :-)

Edit: Lol, parasprite posted while I was typing. :-P

Wow, this one is as old as that it dates back to the time I was a noob at this. Still am

I've made the following changes:

• Implication: pink_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: purple_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: white_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: orange_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: cyan_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: eye_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: tribal_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: whisker_markings -> markings (approved)

Any others? FYI: I left out some smaller tags.

Hudson said:
Wow, this one is as old as that it dates back to the time I was a noob at this. Still am

Nah, noobs don't learn, you're doing great :)

And since you ask: forum #159522 you shouldn't ask ;)

The largest most obvious ones being:

• fur_markings (227)
• brown_markings (190)
• grey_markings (93)
• teal_markings (67)
• forehead_marking (48)
• butt_markings (35)
• rainbow_markings (32)
• breast_markings (27)
• back_markings (21)
• chest_markings (20)

Chessax said:
Nah, noobs don't learn, you're doing great :)

And since you ask: forum #159522 you shouldn't ask ;)

The largest most obvious ones being:

• fur_markings (227)
• brown_markings (190)
• grey_markings (93)
• teal_markings (67)
• forehead_marking (48)
• butt_markings (35)
• rainbow_markings (32)
• breast_markings (27)
• back_markings (21)
• chest_markings (20)

I'm not sure what to do with all the smaller tags mentioned in your forum #159522, but I've just gone ahead and approved all the ones you put here. All but one, actually.

I've made the following changes:

• Implication: fur_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: brown_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: grey_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: teal_markings -> markings (approved) (note: the future of teal is not set in stone)
• Implication: forehead_marking -> markings (pending) (any reason this isn't a plural like the rest?)
• Implication: butt_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: rainbow_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: breast_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: back_markings -> markings (approved)
• Implication: chest_markings -> markings (approved)

_{Note to self: never ask Chessax if they have any more suggestions...}

Hudson said:
I'm not sure what to do with all the smaller tags mentioned in your forum #159522, but I've just gone ahead and approved all the ones you put here. All but one, actually.

Yeah, I know I pretty much went all out and presented people with all possible tags, probably was a bit overwhelming. I like to get a whole genre of tags done in one sitting, but that requires much more engagement from other users.

Hudson said:
(approved) (note: the future of teal is not set in stone)

Absolutely, I have no problem tagging teal (dark aqua / green/blue) and cyan (aqua (/ turquoise)), as distinct colors, but that might not be true if you look at the general e621 population, besides there are edge cases.

Tan/beige is even worse (that I do not know how to differentiate).

Hudson said:

• Implication: forehead_marking -> markings (pending) (any reason this isn't a plural like the rest?)

No idea, maybe more common to e.g. have a single spot or similar on the forehead than multiple, to follow the pattern we might as well:

• markings
• forehead_markings <- forehead_marking

Hudson said:
_{Note to self: never ask Chessax if they have any more suggestions...}

*snicker* You're learning fast.
_{Maybe too fast <.< >.>}

Chessax said:
Tan/beige is even worse (that I do not know how to differentiate).

I use beige if it's light, and tan if it's dark. On the wikipedia page, it lists a bunch of different colors that fit under Beige, but Ecru down look tan to me.

I have a lot of characters with specifically genital related markings like scrotal/labia markings only. If we tag all of those other body zones should I go through and add those as relevant tags?

(I didnt even know those specific of tags were even valid?)

Furrin_Gok said:
I use beige if it's light, and tan if it's dark. On the wikipedia page, it lists a bunch of different colors that fit under Beige, but Ecru down look tan to me.

Yeah, I just haven't dared to use these, the only one I use is tan_fur because beige_fur is aliased to it :P

GDelscribe said:
I have a lot of characters with specifically genital related markings like scrotal/labia markings only. If we tag all of those other body zones should I go through and add those as relevant tags?

(I didnt even know those specific of tags were even valid?)

Well... As long as it describes a distinct feature accurately and can be applied to more than one unique post, I'd say that it's perfectly all right to tag it. The worst thing that's really going to happen is that your tags are later going to be lumped into a more generic tag, making all your hard work for nothing, e.g. labia_majora_markings -> labia_markings -> pussy_markings -> genital_markings or similar.