The bulk update request #3804 is active.

create implication raised_tail (124590) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: Now that tail is once again valid, we can imply things to it!

I have tried to spread the most highly populated tail tags across the BURs so as not to imply the tag on too many posts all at once.

I have also tried to only implicate base tags rather than subtags which will imply the base tags, such as tail_fetish rather than tailjob which will get the tail tag through tail_fetish's implication. Let me know if I missed any.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3804 (forum #353457) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3822 (forum #) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3825 (forum #) has been approved by @slyroon.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3824 (forum #) has been approved by @slyroon.

scaliespe said:
create implication two_tone_tail (20690) -> tail (1993)

tags normally implicate multicolored_x, and multicolored_tail would implicate tail.

The bulk update request #3805 is active.

create implication tail_markings (112356) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: round 2

EDIT: The bulk update request #3805 (forum #353459) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

watsit said:
two_tone_x tags normally implicate multicolored_x, and multicolored_tail would implicate tail.

Fixed, thanks

edit: two_tone_tail -> multicolored_tail is still pending at https://e621.net/forum_topics/24546

The bulk update request #3806 is active.

create implication tail_motion (26360) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_between_legs (2110) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_in_mouth (1244) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_pillow (40) -> tail (1176589)
create implication balancing_on_tail (320) -> tail (1176589)
create implication coiled_tail (374) -> tail (1176589)
create implication hanging_by_tail (293) -> tail (1176589)
create implication lifted_by_tail (286) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: tail bur 3: electric boogaloo

EDIT: The bulk update request #3806 (forum #353461) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3807 is active.

create implication green_tail (7139) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_around_penis (2773) -> tail_play (9729)
create implication tailjob (2185) -> tail_around_penis (2773)
create implication autotailjob (379) -> tail_around_penis (2773)
create implication tail_bondage (1943) -> tail_tied (3152)
create implication tail_tied (3152) -> tail (1176589)
remove implication tail_bondage (1943) -> bound (151856)
create implication tail_tied (3152) -> bound (151856)
create implication huge_tail (2807) -> big_tail (25143)
create implication hyper_tail (364) -> huge_tail (2807)

Reason: Tail BURs 4: A New Hope

This one has the last of the major tail tag implications, as well as some implication chain fixes such as the hyper -> huge -> big formula followed by most other tags. Be sure to look over these to make sure everything sounds correct.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3807 (forum #353462) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

I have left out the following tags:

As far as I know, these tags are still in limbo as to whether or not they should be valid. There has been a bit of debate over the animal humanoid tail tags, and I don't want to imply them now just for them to be aliased away later. The tail_around_* tags may be valid, although some of the lesser used ones start to become extremely granular, like tail_around_pseudo-penis, with a whopping one post to its name. We may not need all of these, so I'm leaving them out of the BUR pending discussion. Also, I think most, if not all of these would end up implying prehensile tail rather than tail directly, so they're still somewhat outside the scope of this BUR.

The bulk update request #3808 is active.

create implication white_tail (29828) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: Okay, so I'm splitting the BUR into much smaller chunks at the behest of gattonero, so... here's a nice one, enjoy

ayy this one matches my profile picture

EDIT: The bulk update request #3808 (forum #353468) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3810 is active.

create implication black_tail (20839) -> tail (1176589)
create implication countershade_tail (11408) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: another one

EDIT: The bulk update request #3810 (forum #353471) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

scaliespe said:
create implication tail_in_pants (28) -> tail (1993)

The tail isn't always visible when in the pants:
post #3234038 post #3234041

The bulk update request #3811 is active.

create implication multicolored_tail (65073) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: big one

EDIT: The bulk update request #3811 (forum #353474) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3812 is active.

create implication monotone_tail (6371) -> tail (1176589)
create implication multi_tone_tail (635) -> tail (1176589)
create implication lifted_by_tail (286) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_in_mouth (1244) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_fondling (16) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_grab (12088) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_hug (1285) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_pull (2805) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: more!

EDIT: The bulk update request #3812 (forum #353475) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3813 is active.

create implication multi_tail (32966) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: another big one

EDIT: The bulk update request #3813 (forum #353476) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

watsit said:
The tail isn't always visible when in the pants:
post #3234038 post #3234041

Ok, fair point.

The bulk update request #3814 is active.

create implication tail_fetish (9811) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_condom (12) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_censorship (939) -> tail (1176589)
create implication cum_on_tail (6551) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_fin (6910) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_frill (578) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_ridge (477) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_scarf (42) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_coil (4778) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: why must I type at least 5 characters in the reason field for each of these? :c

EDIT: The bulk update request #3814 (forum #353480) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3815 is active.

create implication hand_on_tail (1231) -> tail (1176589)
create implication holding_tail (3348) -> tail (1176589)
create implication purple_tail (9655) -> tail (1176589)
create implication red_tail (7994) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tan_tail (7923) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: a few more

EDIT: The bulk update request #3815 (forum #353481) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3816 is active.

create implication tail_tuft (43598) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: mmm, floofy

EDIT: The bulk update request #3816 (forum #353482) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3817 is active.

create implication big_tail (25143) -> tail (1176589)
create implication furry_tail (477) -> tail (1176589)
create implication scaly_tail (796) -> tail (1176589)
create implication feathered_tail (732) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_clothing (3104) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: i like big tails and i cannot lie

something something anacondas

EDIT: The bulk update request #3817 (forum #353483) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3818 is active.

create implication tail_accessory (18181) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_orb (122) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_piercing (2384) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_wraps (3950) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: these are cute

EDIT: The bulk update request #3818 (forum #353484) has failed: Error: tail_jewelry already implies tail through another implication (create implication tail_jewelry -> tail)

EDIT: The bulk update request #3818 (forum #353484) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3819 is active.

create implication thick_tail (25335) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_dimple (176) -> tail (1176589)
create implication coiled_tail (374) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_cuff (879) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_around_leg (849) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_around_waist (201) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: ah yes, THICC TAIL
a personal favorite tag of mine

EDIT: The bulk update request #3819 (forum #353485) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3820 is active.

create implication tail_aside (3628) -> tail (1176589)
create implication orange_tail (10861) -> tail (1176589)
create implication pink_tail (11299) -> tail (1176589)
create implication unusual_tail (8809) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: tails r great

EDIT: The bulk update request #3820 (forum #353486) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3821 is active.

create implication short_tail (46927) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: just a stubby lil' thing

EDIT: The bulk update request #3821 (forum #353487) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3823 is active.

create implication blue_tail (18501) -> tail (1176589)
create implication small_tail (6487) -> tail (1176589)
create implication skinny_tail (7) -> tail (1176589)
create implication crooked_tail (578) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: im blue. da ba dee da ba die

EDIT: The bulk update request #3823 (forum #353488) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3827 is active.

create implication tail_feathers (17125) -> tail (1176589)
create implication grey_tail (13625) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: mmm yes, very grey. like gandalf.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3827 (forum #353495) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #3828 is active.

create implication long_tail (59137) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: mm yes very lomg

EDIT: The bulk update request #3828 (forum #353496) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3829 is active.

create implication fluffy_tail (97326) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: ah yes, floof
not my specialty

EDIT: The bulk update request #3829 (forum #353497) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3804 (forum #353457) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3834 is active.

create implication tail_growth (5131) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_expansion (82) -> tail (1176589)

Reason: For the tails to be growing or expanding it needs to be seen no?

EDIT: The bulk update request #3834 (forum #353542) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

scaliespe said:
create implication tail_feathers (12264) -> tail (2348)

Would that really be considered a tail for the purposes of the tag? I'm not sure a person looking for tails would expect things like
post #3765313 post #3740503

shadowstones said:
The bulk update request #3834 is active.

create implication tail_growth (5131) -> tail (1176589)
create implication tail_expansion (82) -> tail (1176589)
Reason: For the tails to be growing or expanding it needs to be seen no?

That can happen concealed in pants, too:
post #3234041

watsit said:
Would that really be considered a tail for the purposes of the tag? I'm not sure a person looking for tails would expect things like
post #3765313 post #3740503

That can happen concealed in pants, too:
post #3234041

We still tag breasts no matter if they are concealed by clothing or not. Why would it be any different for tails?

shadowstones said:
We still tag breasts no matter if they are concealed by clothing or not. Why would it be any different for tails?

Some things are, some things aren't. We don't do that with penis, not even penis_outline implies penis. But if that's the way you think tail should be handled, fair enough. Then the tail_in_pants implication would be valid, too.

The bulk update request #3805 (forum #353459) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

shadowstones said:
We still tag breasts no matter if they are concealed by clothing or not. Why would it be any different for tails?

I think breasts is an exception rather than a rule to follow by, when other things are concealed by clothing they're generally not tagged. A penis underneath clothes will be tagged as bulge or penis_outline depending on how detailed. Pussy isn't tagged, but camel_toe instead. Nipples under clothes are instead tagged as nipple_outline.

faucet said:
I think breasts is an exception rather than a rule to follow by, when other things are concealed by clothing they're generally not tagged. A penis underneath clothes will be tagged as bulge or penis_outline depending on how detailed. Pussy isn't tagged, but camel_toe instead. Nipples under clothes are instead tagged as nipple_outline.

I also see that diapers are also tagged, even if they technically arent seen, though sometimes you can tell by the outline it makes, but others, the outline is barely there, yet its still tagged

The bulk update request #3811 (forum #353474) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3808 (forum #353468) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3816 (forum #353482) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3828 (forum #353496) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

shadowstones said:
We still tag breasts no matter if they are concealed by clothing or not. Why would it be any different for tails?

watsit said:
Some things are, some things aren't. We don't do that with penis, not even penis_outline implies penis. But if that's the way you think tail should be handled, fair enough. Then the tail_in_pants implication would be valid, too.

faucet said:
I think breasts is an exception rather than a rule to follow by, when other things are concealed by clothing they're generally not tagged. A penis underneath clothes will be tagged as bulge or penis_outline depending on how detailed. Pussy isn't tagged, but camel_toe instead. Nipples under clothes are instead tagged as nipple_outline.

cutefox123 said:
I also see that diapers are also tagged, even if they technically arent seen, though sometimes you can tell by the outline it makes, but others, the outline is barely there, yet its still tagged

*sigh*

Yeah, I hadn’t considered this. Since tail has never been a valid tag, we’ve never had to debate how to handle it. Should it be “character has X,” or “X is directly visible?”

Let’s consider the use cases of comparable tags.

Requiring things like genitals and nipples to be directly visible makes sense in terms of ratings. A camel toe or bulge can be rating:questionable whereas the genitals being directly visible makes the post explicit. Nipple outlines on breasts can be rating:safe while exposed nipples will be questionable at minimum. This way, you can run a search like pussy -rating:e to easily find misrated posts, which you couldn’t do if camel toes counted for the pussy tag. The direct visibility of a tail isn’t going to affect ratings, so it isn’t essential in this case to require that they be visible to get the tag. Likewise with breasts due to the case of featureless_breasts, it only requires a rating of questionable or higher if there are visible nipples.

Besides that, consider the fact that tails, especially in certain species, can be more akin to a limb than a minor feature like nipples. We don’t have a leg tag, but a standing character wearing a dress that covers the legs does not get tagged as apode just because we can’t see the legs. Especially if you can still see the outline of the legs through the clothing, tagging the character as biped is perfectly appropriate. Likewise, I think any direct evidence of a tail, even if obscured by clothing, should qualify for the tail tag.

Not to mention that I imagine this would make a mess of a lot of these implications otherwise. Could we not tag long_tail even if the tail is covered completely by clothing or something, but is still obviously long? I don’t know if there are any posts like that, but it could be a problem. We already have a problem tagging different kinds of penises when it’s a penis_outline.

So I’m leaning in favor of not requiring the tail to be directly visible. Any objections or additional thoughts?

watsit said:
Would that really be considered a tail for the purposes of the tag? I'm not sure a person looking for tails would expect things like
post #3765313 post #3740503

I’m not sure if the koraidon should actually be tagged with tail_feathers. I feel like that’s not the purpose of the tag. And that character has a real tail regardless.

For the second post, assuming wings is a valid tag here (which may be debatable as it seems to be some kind of magic rather than actual anatomy), I believe tail would also be valid.

My understanding of that tag is that it’s for “the kind of tail that birds have,” which I’m assuming counts as a tail, even if it’s mainly composed of feathers.

faucet said:
I think breasts is an exception rather than a rule to follow by, when other things are concealed by clothing they're generally not tagged. A penis underneath clothes will be tagged as bulge or penis_outline depending on how detailed. Pussy isn't tagged, but camel_toe instead. Nipples under clothes are instead tagged as nipple_outline.

I can think of a few other examples. wings comes to mind. Is post #2973032 still able to be tagged as wings even though the wings are covered? Or perhaps fingers? A character wearing gloves still gets tagged with fingers.

The bulk update request #3813 (forum #353476) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3829 (forum #353497) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3821 (forum #353487) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3810 (forum #353471) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3806 (forum #353461) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3815 (forum #353481) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3823 (forum #353488) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3814 (forum #353480) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3820 (forum #353486) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3812 (forum #353475) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3807 (forum #353462) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3819 (forum #353485) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3817 (forum #353483) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3818 (forum #353484) has failed: Error: tail_jewelry already implies tail through another implication (create implication tail_jewelry -> tail)

The bulk update request #3818 (forum #353484) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

watsit said:
Would that really be considered a tail for the purposes of the tag?

This is something I've wondered for a while, although much of my confusion was more-so related to the various color tags. Like red_tail vs. red_tail_feathers. Primarily in the context of species with both a traditional tail and tail feathers. It puts some feathered_dinosaurs, among other species, into an odd position. Would any feathers that happen to be attached to the tail region be considered a tail feather, for the purposes of tagging? Do only ones shaped like modern avian tail feathers count? What about dinosaurs or dragons with a fan of feathers at the end of their tail? Or the smaller fluffy feather coating some artists put along the whole tail?

I feel like the argument could go either way, although for tagging/searching purposes, I'd almost lean more towards separating larger feather fan tails from the "otherwise scaly tail, but has a bit of fluff on it". This all assuming the various *_tail_feathers tags don't just get nuked.

The bulk update request #3822 (forum #) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3834 (forum #353542) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #3827 (forum #353495) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #3825 (forum #) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #3824 (forum #) has been approved by @slyroon.