Reason: Although horseshoe crabs belong to the same subphylum as arachnids (Chelicerata), they are not arachnids themselves.

The bulk update request #4445 is active.

remove implication horseshoe_crab (26) -> arachnid (13610)

Reason: Per above - making it an actual BUR that can be voted on

EDIT: The bulk update request #4445 (forum #361158) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

Closely related to arachnids but not arachnids themselves. It should imply arthropod instead.

faucet said:
The bulk update request #4445 is active.

remove implication horseshoe_crab (26) -> arachnid (13610)

Reason: Per above - making it an actual BUR that can be voted on

Thank you for making it a BUR! Sorry about that — I’m still new to the forums and figuring things out.

faucet said:
Closely related to arachnids but not arachnids themselves. It should imply arthropod instead.

Why not edit the BUR to imply horseshoe_crab to arthropod as well and save yourself a BUR?

clawstripe said:
Why not edit the BUR to imply horseshoe_crab to arthropod as well and save yourself a BUR?

I either forgot that it works that way, or thought that somebody might suggest an implication to chelicerate instead, but I just tried to do it now and this happened:

Error: horseshoe_crab already implies arthropod through another implication (create implication horseshoe_crab -> arthropod)

I guess I'll need a second request after all.

The bulk update request #4445 (forum #361158) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #7211 is active.

create implication horseshoe_crab (26) -> arthropod (79003)

Reason: horseshoe crabs are arthropods

EDIT: The bulk update request #7211 (forum #397026) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #7213 is active.

create implication sea_spider (3) -> arthropod (79003)

Reason:

faucet said:
I either forgot that it works that way... but I just tried to do it now and this happened:

Error: horseshoe_crab already implies arthropod through another implication (create implication horseshoe_crab -> arthropod)

I guess I'll need a second request after all.

That hadn't occurred to me, I admit. :\

... or thought that somebody might suggest an implication to chelicerate instead...

We do have chelicerate, but there's only three posts to it and no implications or aliases. However, arachnid directly implicates arthropod. Considering the complaints some have had about the incomprehensibility of some of our taxonomy tags, I don't think it would hurt anything if we just implicated horseshoe_crab and sea_spider directly to arthropod as well. It's still accurate, but it leaves one little known tier out of the implication chain.

Edit: Oops, SNP beat me to it. Still, sea_spider does need to be implied as well.
___________________

On the other hand, if it's thought that we should use chelicerate after all, the BURs would have to be:

imply horseshoe_crab -> chelicerate
imply sea_spider -> chelicerate
imply chelicerate -> arthropod
unimply arachnid -> arthropod

followed by:

imply arachnid -> chelicerate

EDIT: The bulk update request #7213 (forum #397033) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #7211 (forum #397026) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #7213 (forum #397033) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.