The bulk update request #8140 has been rejected.

create alias nude_male (20057) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_female (21970) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_intersex (4148) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_andromorph (791) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_gynomorph (3325) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_herm (308) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_maleherm (229) -> nude (1222144)
create alias nude_male (20057) -> male (2444638)
create alias nude_female (21970) -> female (2492675)
create alias nude_intersex (4148) -> intersex (239536)
create alias nude_andromorph (791) -> andromorph (22524)
create alias nude_gynomorph (3325) -> gynomorph (189025)
create alias nude_herm (308) -> herm (26742)
create alias nude_maleherm (229) -> maleherm (4361)

Reason: All of the post aliases are likely candidates for post tags.

EDIT: The bulk update request #8140 (forum #405276) has been rejected by @slyroon.

Nude characters can be paired with clothed characters, nude + [gender] doesn't reliably return only nude characters of said gender.

Also the reason makes no sense.

were these supposed to be implications? because half of the BUR operations contradict the other half.

dba_afish said:
were these supposed to be implications? because half of the BUR operations contradict the other half.

Seems like so.

Maybe they can edit the BUR.
Change every create alias to create implication

coffeeco said:
Seems like so.

Maybe they can edit the BUR.
Change every create alias to create implication

So many voted on it already, might as well reject and reissue a new one with this topic ID (44421) with the implication.

alphamule said:
So many voted on it already, might as well reject and reissue a new one with this topic ID (44421) with the implication.

No, they really shouldn't
Slocheze has already partially covered it (and other states of undress) in their BUR, and it would be a duplicate with the same issues as the original (nude_[intersex] implying nude directly instead of going through nude_intersex)

The bulk update request #8140 (forum #405276) has been rejected by @slyroon.