Topic: [APPROVED] Boots withe the BUR

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

The bulk update request #8568 is active.

remove implication boots (73971) -> footwear (257972)
remove implication sandals (14092) -> footwear (257972)
remove implication high_heels (56573) -> footwear (257972)
remove implication high_heeled_shoes (5) -> high_heels (56573)
remove implication high_heeled_shoes (5) -> shoes (192186)
remove implication high_heeled_sneakers (81) -> high_heeled_shoes (5)

Reason: Next:
imply boots -> shoes
imply sandals -> shoes
imply high_heels -> shoes
alias high_heeled_shoes -> high_heels
imply high_heeled_sneakers -> high_heels

With boots there's a good deal of grey-area here like post #4831770 and post #4822230 and shoes -boots turns up quite a decent number of boots.

I assume high_heels doesn't imply shoes because they can be boots and/or sandals. The result is that a lot of high_heeled_shoes are missing that tag.

There's less ambiguity around when a shoe becomes a sandal, with the exception of high heels. But I figured sure, why not throw it in the bur too.

Eta: Don't quote the wikis. I know the boots wiki says "boots are NOT shoes" I just think that's pointless.

EDIT: The bulk update request #8568 (forum #408400) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

regsmutt said:
I think I did it right?

No it should be in the current BUR and flipped

unimply high_heeled_shoes -> high_heels
unimply high_heeled_shoes -> shoes
unimply high_heeled_sneakers -> high_heeled_shoes

Updated

  • 1