The bulk update request #6497 is active.

remove implication patch_(marking) (556) -> facial_markings (49036)
create implication eye_patch_(marking) (400) -> facial_markings (49036)
create implication eye_patch_(marking) (400) -> patch_(marking) (556)

Reason: Was looking for a tag for patched markings and noticed that patch_(marking) implies facial_markings. I can only assume this is because the tag is supposed to refer to the common patch over the eye like this.
post #2511331
But there's no tag for patches elsewhere on the body. I don't see a point in creating a new one when it's bound to be confused with this one due to the vague naming.
I propose eye_patch_(marking) as a separate, more clear tag for the over the eye patch and let patch_(marking) be for any type of patch marking.

Afterward:
imply patch_(marking) -> markings

EDIT: The bulk update request #6497 (forum #390358) has been approved by @slyroon.

Patches elsewhere on the body? Aren't those spots? spotted_body or spots? If you're looking for multi-colored spots, usually leopard_spots fits best

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Patches elsewhere on the body? Aren't those spots? Spotted_body or spots? If you're looking for multi-colored spots, usually leopard_spots fits best

There's overlap but spots aren't what I'm looking for. Patches are large sections of differentiated color or pattern, more free-form than spots and can be large enough to cover entire sections of the body. I'm too sleepy to explain good, so take some examples:
This girl has a mix of spots stripes and patches.
post #3260616
Red patches. I wouldn't call these spots.
post #3426682
Patches of white and pattern caused by piebaldism.
post #3557648
This guy has patches of spots.
post #4593768

The bulk update request #6497 (forum #390358) has been approved by @slyroon.