Implicating facial_scar → scar
Link to implication

Reason:

Facial scars are scars, though facial_scar is rarely used.

If this is approved would that mean that eye_scar should be implicated to facial_scar?

JAKXXX3 said:
If this is approved would that mean that eye_scar should be implicated to facial_scar?

What if the eye with the scar is not on the character's face?

http://img.rule34.xxx//images/1679/bb34654f9bfde11d4b55cd23927b6912.png

BlueDingo said:
What if the eye with the scar is not on the character's face?

http://img.rule34.xxx//images/1679/bb34654f9bfde11d4b55cd23927b6912.png

That could be a potential issue. Though to be fair, the image you linked was from rule34, not e621. Yet it wouldn't be unlikely for such an image to show up on e621 eventually, if it hasn't already. Probably for the best to keep eye_scar implicated directly to scar, though it'd be good to manually/script add facial_scar to the current posts we have tagged with eye_scar.

I would've linked an e621 image but I didn't know of any off the top of my head.

BlueDingo said:
What if the eye with the scar is not on the character's face?

An eye located at any body part except face is truely possible, however uncommon; combine this with the possibility of this particular eye be marked with a scar and we have an extremely improbable situation. I would consider to implicate 'eye_scar' → 'facial_scar'.

p.s. I am almost sure that saw this suggestion somewhere… found it: forum #208728.

edit: woops! I forgot evaluating the main suggestion, +1.

Approved OP.

Pending eye_scar -> facial_scar (forum #208728)