The bulk update request #8362 has been rejected.

create implication sweet_notes_(mlp) (1) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication bright_eyes_(mlp) (8) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication melody_(mlp) (6) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication patch_(mlp) (5) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication sweetheart_(mlp) (6) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication starlight_(mlpt) (2) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication bonbon_(mlpt) (9) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication teddy_(mlp) (1) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication moki_sunbright (2) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication lancer_(mlp) (1) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication clover_(mlp) (2) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)

Reason: Characters from My Little Pony Tales.

EDIT: The bulk update request #8362 (forum #407000) has been rejected by @Nimphia.

nimphia said:
The bulk update request #8362 has been rejected.

create implication sweet_notes_(mlp) (1) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication bright_eyes_(mlp) (8) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication melody_(mlp) (6) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication patch_(mlp) (5) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication sweetheart_(mlp) (6) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication starlight_(mlpt) (2) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication bonbon_(mlpt) (9) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication teddy_(mlp) (1) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication moki_sunbright (2) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication lancer_(mlp) (1) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)
create implication clover_(mlp) (2) -> my_little_pony_tales (34)

Reason: Characters from My Little Pony Tales.

honestly, I wonder if maybe we just shouldn't be using *_(mlp) as part of the tagnames at all. there's nothing stopping them from bringing back new incarnations of these characters in later versions of the series.

I mean, we already have the problem of *_(mlp) just meaning that something is from friendship_is_magic most of the time (for some reason). we should probably try to keep the problem from getting any worse...

dba_afish said:
honestly, I wonder if maybe we just shouldn't be using *_(mlp) as part of the tagnames at all. there's nothing stopping them from bringing back new incarnations of these characters in later versions of the series.

I mean, we already have the problem of *_(mlp) just meaning that something is from friendship_is_magic most of the time (for some reason). we should probably try to keep the problem from getting any worse...

I'm not against that, but it'd be a major pain in the ass. That being said, my generation BUR is already a pain in the ass. I've just been using (mlp_g1), (mlp_g3), etc. for ponies that share names.

Though I think enough people have expressed support for the idea that it's probably something that should happen, but I'm not entirely sure what to replace it with. I see the argument often that "Rainbow Dash" doesn't need a suffix for example, but... She does. There is another MLP character named Rainbow Dash that predates her. But since she's more popular, she's the "default" by the site's standard, and I'm not sure how to go about undoing that whole precedent when there are hundreds of MLP character tags.

The bulk update request #8362 (forum #407000) has been rejected by @Nimphia.

Just for the time being, I'm going to make a thread where the *_(mlp) issue can be discussed.