Implicating red_lipstick → lipstick
Link to implication

Reason:

Posts that tag a specific colour of lipstick should also include the general lipstick tag.

The other *colour*_lipstick tags should also be implicated:
red_lipstick → lipstick
purple_lipstick → lipstick
blue_lipstick → lipstick
pink_lipstick → lipstick
yellow_lipstick → lipstick
green_lipstick → lipstick
dark_lipstick → lipstick
violet_lipstick → lipstick

Dark_lipstick isn't used, so I didn't make that implication. I also added both white and black lipstick colors because those are commonly used.

Violet is a purple, so I aliased violet to purple since that one is more common.

Rest got created and approved.

NotMeNotYou said:
Dark_lipstick isn't used, so I didn't make that implication. I also added both white and black lipstick colors because those are commonly used.

Violet is a purple, so I aliased violet to purple since that one is more common.

Rest got created and approved.

Awesome; though I did notice lipstick_(object) was lacking the lipstick implication. Would it be too much to ask for that to also imply it?

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Awesome; though I did notice lipstick_(object) was lacking the lipstick implication. Would it be too much to ask for that to also imply it?

Added and approved.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Awesome; though I did notice lipstick_(object) was lacking the lipstick implication. Would it be too much to ask for that to also imply it?

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Awesome; though I did notice lipstick_(object) was lacking the lipstick implication. Would it be too much to ask for that to also imply it?

Can't there be a lipstick_(object) in a post without any applied lipstick or kissmarks? Or should the lipstick wiki be changed to include the object?

MyNameIsOver20charac said:
Can't there be a lipstick_(object) in a post without any applied lipstick or kissmarks? Or should the lipstick wiki be changed to include the object?

I mean if the object exists, there's inherently lipstick.

Maybe the wiki should be edited to mention the object, yeah. It's undertagged unfortunately so that's probably why it's confusing