The tag implication #50396 hooters_uniform -> hooters has been approved.

Reason: Additionally, implicate hooters from hooters_owl too.

EDIT: The tag implication hooters_uniform -> hooters (forum #361626) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The tag does not always relate to the original Hooters franchise.
It is used for all sorts of Hooters-style uniforms, which often times are shown as parodies of the franchise (as opposed to using the real name).

thegreatwolfgang said:
The tag does not always relate to the original Hooters franchise.
It is used for all sorts of Hooters-style uniforms, which often times are shown as parodies of the franchise (as opposed to using the real name).

I think that's a problem with the current usage rather than the implication itself. I don't think hooters_uniform should be tagged on anything that doesn't relate to the Hooters franchise, otherwise it's objectively not a Hooters uniform.

I've always thought it was a bit strange that brand parodies where the brand is very clear (like idk, Shmooters for example lol) aren't supposed to get tagged with the brand they're clearly showing. Someone searching for hooters prooobably wants to see brand parodies too

Edit: never mind I completely made this up apparently, the brand_parody wiki even says to tag the brand

The tag implication hooters_uniform -> hooters (forum #361626) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.