I was analyzing the implications approved during the last seven days and some of them had seemed a bit strange to me, so I listed them and created this thread with the intent of obtain some elucidation.

p.s. I am not trying to accuse anyone of incompetence.

wagging → tailwag

forum #225119

Implication was probably a mistake on the admins part.

Blind_Guardian said:
wagging → tailwag

forum #225119

Implication was probably a mistake on the admins part.

¹ Sure... link added.

hmm... interesting, didnt notice my implication regarding triple_penis -> multi_penis was approved(your organization tree suggestion did seem kinda sound^_^) in fact all of those are missing the approval message that is generally applied to all implications and aliases suggested by users other then admins sence e621 was reinstated around 3 years ago...

O16 said:

triple_penis → multi_penis (forum #228409).

The content in the respective thread appears to have been ignored.

No, the current tag tree is working as intended.
Multi_* tags are for 'more than usual'. For instance, feral species that are normally quadrupedal do not get multi_leg tag.

Hemipenis is a single organ with two shafts (so technically not a double_penis), and it's the standard type for RL reptilian species (so it's not multi_anything).

Genjar said:
No, the current tag tree is working as intended.
Multi_* tags are for 'more than usual'. For instance, feral species that are normally quadrupedal do not get multi_leg tag.

Hemipenis is a single organ with two shafts (so technically not a double_penis), and it's the standard type for RL reptilian species (so it's not multi_anything).

So why does 'hemipenes' imply 'multi_penis'?

O16 said:
So why does 'hemipenes' imply 'multi_penis'?

Just an another mess that we never got around to sorting out. Thanks for the reminder.

Just want to point out previous dissussion on the cleavage_cutout issue in forum #223354.