The bulk update request #925 is pending approval.

create alias whale_tail (136) -> horizontal_fluked_tail (0)
create alias dolphin_tail (59) -> horizontal_fluked_tail (0)
create alias cetacean_tail (43) -> horizontal_fluked_tail (0)
create implication horizontal_fluked_tail (0) -> fluked_tail (0)
create implication vertical_fluked_tail (0) -> fluked_tail (0)
create alias shark_tail (3037) -> vertical_fluked_tail (0)

Reason: The concept was brought up over three years ago, but whale and dolphin tails are still getting tagged separately, despite them being the same kind of tail. Whale Tail currently includes a lot of... different stuff

snowwolf said:
whale_tail is a tag, but it's used for something a bit... different, hahah. as for whales.. there are about 50 posts in cetacean merfolk about half of which are cetacean mermaids, versus mermaids with whale friends.

Hairnoi said (through Discord):

Whale tail is the Y-shaped waistband of a thong or G-string when visible above the waistline of low-rise jeans, shorts, or a skirt that resembles a whale's tail.

Not the best term for the tag given that there's cat_tail and yada yada for actual tails

Frankly, a person reading the word "Tail" at the end of the tag is bound to think "Oh hey yeah that means a literal tail." The thong ones need to be moved to a new tag or purged entirely, whether this BUR gets support or not.

As of this message, whale_tail doesn't include a lot of different stuff. So far it has been used for the exposed Y-shaped thongs, and it's a slang for such.
That being said, that tag shouldn't be aliased straight away without any other sort of proposed replacement.

As for the dolphin_tail -> cetacean_tail implication, it shouldn't be a thing since the cetaceans are a group of aquatic mammals not exclusively composed by dolphins or whales, as there are the ambulocetid that doesn't share the same delphinoid tail structure.

hairnoi said:
As of this message, currently, whale_tail doesn't include a lot of different stuff. So far it has been used for the exposed Y-shaped thongs, and it's a slang for such.
That being said, that tag shouldn't be aliased straight away without any other sort of proposed replacement.

As for the dolphin_tail -> cetacean_tail implication, it shouldn't be a thing since the cetaceans are a group of aquatic mammals not exclusively composed by dolphins or whales, as there are the ambulocetid that doesn't share the same delphinoid tail structure.

A tail is a tail, not a thong. You can't convince me the tag doesn't need to be moved, at the very least to whale_tail_(thong) or whale_tail_(slang).

Cetacean may include some species that don't have any fins off their tail, but Delphinoid excludes some species that do. If we wanted to avoid calling it a cetacean_tail, perhaps fluked_tail would be more appropriate?

furrin_gok said:
A tail is a tail, not a thong. You can't convince me the tag doesn't need to be moved, at the very least to whale_tail_(thong) or whale_tail_(slang).

Just saying that it should be cleaned up with the current posts being moved to a proper tag first and foremost.

furrin_gok said:
Cetacean may include some species that don't have any fins off their tail, but Delphinoid excludes some species that do. If we wanted to avoid calling it a cetacean_tail, perhaps fluked_tail would be more appropriate?

Perhaps. Curiously enough there's flukes.

In overall, you should edit this BUR or reconsider things first. As much "a tail is a tail", "whale tail" is a fairly common slang and it's tag equivalent had been properly used for such meaning, save for one or probably other few cases.

hairnoi said:
Perhaps. Curiously enough there's flukes.

And tail_fin. This seems to have similar argumentation over the cow_tail discussion, to tag the tail based on taxonomic species, which may not always make sense.

watsit said:
And tail_fin. This seems to have similar argumentation over the cow_tail discussion, to tag the tail based on taxonomic species, which may not always make sense.

Tail_fin isn't always a "fluked tail" however, as it can also represent other fins that are spread along the tail. Flukes would represent the unique shape only present at the tail-end of the tail.
Hence I didn't mention tail_fin at first.

hairnoi said:
Just saying that it should be cleaned up with the current posts being moved to a proper tag first and foremost.

Absolutely, I have no desire to see an alias go through before those get moved.

Perhaps. Curiously enough there's flukes.

In overall, you should edit this BUR or reconsider things first. As much "a tail is a tail", "whale tail" is a fairly common slang and it's tag equivalent had been properly used for such meaning, save for one or probably other few cases.

Flukes definitely seems to fit, though I'd prefer it be moved to fluked_tail just so that it shows up in the *_tail search. And I'm perfectly fine with changing up the BUR as discussion moves along.

What about shark tails? Biologically they're made of dermal fibers whereas flukes are made of cartilage, but you can't really see that difference in a drawing. Should we have horizontal_fluked_tail and vertical_fluked_tail which then imply fluked_tail?

hairnoi said:
Tail_fin isn't always a "fluked tail" however, as it can also represent other fins that are spread along the tail. Flukes would represent the unique shape only present at the tail-end of the tail.

Would it make sense for flukes (or fluked_tail) to implicate tail_fin?

furrin_gok said:
What about shark tails? Biologically they're made of dermal fibers whereas flukes are made of cartilage, but you can't really see that difference in a drawing. Should we have horizontal_fluked_tail and vertical_fluked_tail which then imply fluked_tail?

I'm not comfortable with the aliases, as there's still the problem "cetacean" not being composed of only mammals that posses fluked tails (again, i.e. ambulocetid), and it would be just an ambiguous step up in the grouping generalization. I do find it more interesting if it were all implications, however I struggle in finding its use and implementation.

watsit said:
Would it make sense for flukes (or fluked_tail) to implicate tail_fin?

No.

--

To explain my answers, after a bit of research and after looking through sources, I've found that there's a fair distinction regarding fins and flukes.

Fins are composed of membranous and bony or cartilagenous structures, which are vertical, present in fishes of various types and species. Furthermore, flukes are mainly composed of horizontal membranous and muscular structures without bones, and as I've found and understood, they are only present in the existing cetaceans suborders, dolphins and whales, that are mammals.
That in mind, I also haven't found any source in the internet that correlates flukes with fins, besides for some erroneous denominations that "flukes are fins" or "fins of X species are called flukes", there isn't any detailed terminology, but also, there isn't any relation of fishes that have flukes (as they have fins) or existing cetaceans that have fins (as they have flappers, flukes, and the occasional dorsal fin/finlets).

All that said, flukes are different to fins, sharks don't posses flukes to be aliased in such manner, as they follow the fish-like vertical tail fin structure. As for vertical flukes, I've found, without confidence in the sources, that some prehistorical species had those.

The fluked_tail seems like a decent tag to have flukes aliased to, but I'm still in deep disagreement with the other proposed aliases. The implications do seem fit, as long they have some use IMO. But that's another 1000 things.

hairnoi said:
Fins are composed of membranous and bony or cartilagenous structures, which are vertical, present in fishes of various types and species. Furthermore, flukes are mainly composed of horizontal membranous and muscular structures without bones, and as I've found and understood, they are only present in the existing cetaceans suborders, dolphins and whales, that are mammals.
That in mind, I also haven't found any source in the internet that correlates flukes with fins, besides for some erroneous denominations that "flukes are fins" or "fins of X species are called flukes", there isn't any detailed terminology, but also, there isn't any relation of fishes that have flukes (as they have fins) or existing cetaceans that have fins (as they have flappers, flukes, and the occasional dorsal fin/finlets).

• Fins
• Membranes and cartilaginous/bony structures
• Typically accepted to be a thinner structure
• Flukes
• Membranes and cartilaginous structures
• Thicker structure

I don't know which articles you were reading, but Flukes are cartilaginous, just never bony. Flukes are thicker than the average fin, but that's why I'm supporting an implication, not an alias.

All that said, flukes are different to fins, sharks don't posses flukes to be aliased in such manner, as they follow the fish-like vertical tail fin structure. As for vertical flukes, I've found, without confidence in the sources, that some prehistorical species had those.

Shark tails are thick, and made with cartilage just like a dolphin's fluke. The difference? It's vertical. Sharks and cetaceans had different evolutionary trees, but their tails are different only in alignment.
Even if the tails were different on the inside, they look very similar on the outside--some sharks just happen to have a larger half on the top of their caudal fin, while cetaceans always have symmetrical tails. We can't tag what's on the inside, not unless the image explicitly shows it--we typically only see the outside and so only tag the outside.

hairnoi said:
I'm not comfortable with the aliases, as there's still the problem "cetacean" not being composed of only mammals that posses fluked tails (again, i.e. ambulocetid), and it would be just an ambiguous step up in the grouping generalization. I do find it more interesting if it were all implications, however I struggle in finding its use and implementation.

Nobody's going to tag cetacean_tail for an ambulocetid, it would be entirely silly to do so.