The bulk update request #8857 is pending approval.

create implication excessive_oviposition (68) -> multiple_oviposits (140)
create implication excessive_birth (19) -> multiple_birth (373)
create implication unison_oviposition (3) -> multiple_oviposits (140)

Reason: Tags related to oviposition have been created/redefined to mirror their birth counterparts

• excessive birth -> excessive oviposition
• hyper birth -> hyper oviposition
• multiple birth -> multiple oviposits

This BUR creates implications from excessive to multiple for both oviposition and birth
Additionally aliases the excessive_eggs tag away to excessive_oviposition since it's being used for the same purpose

Also would like some input on the minimum # of eggs/offspring to warrant the 'excessive' tag

Edit: I'm surprised to have found some posts where an oviposition version of the unison birth tag would apply, so I've gone ahead and made the unison_oviposition tag and wiki and added a multiple implication to the BUR

bit unclear on what the difference between excessive_oviposition and multiple_oviposits is given their wikis and submissions seem to all cover and are restricted to the same specific thing.

Also I am not too keen on utilizing the "multiple_" prefix for these instead of the "excessive_" prefix as it might open the door to people just using the tag for multiple characters having normal sized egglaying over a specific character having a unusually large sized litter/clutch. I must admit also that I did have to look up what "oviposit" is and if that was even a real term^^;, I very much love egglaying/oviposition but have never seen that term used by anyone before, take that as you like.

In regard to excessive_eggs you can have that without oviposition going on, this shouldn't be aliased to excessive oviposition.

Now as far as what might count as a excessive number of offspring that depends on both the species, average size of individuals of the species at maturity and whether they have offspring live born or in eggs. number of nipples also define birth rate but only mammals really have nipples or teats irl and anthros kinda make this particular factor useless. The clearest fact is that most living species that are as large or larger then a Human will usually not have more than 2 offspring at a time, most common exceptions to that rule really being extinct dinosaurs and fictional dragons who are often depicted or described as having litters/clutches comparable to cats if the offspring are live and anything from a dozen to 100 if the offspring are in eggs.
Most species in reptiles, amphibians and fish will have offspring anywhere from a dozen to a 100. Insects in turn can reach over a 1000 at a time...

For our usage the simplest cover is probably to just say any pile of eggs that you can easily sit up against or lay almost your entire body on without touching the ground(think the stereotypical situation of a dragon sitting on its hoard). Not the best, but the only description that comes to mind at the moment. A specific number of eggs by the way is kinda useless when we have animal species such as the Kiwi Bird who can lay a single egg that is literally half its own body compared to frogs that can fit a dozen of their eggs on their backs for example..

ryu_deacon said:
[...]
Also I am not too keen on utilizing the "multiple_" prefix for these instead of the "excessive_" prefix as it might open the door to people just using the tag for multiple characters having normal sized egglaying over a specific character having a unusually large sized litter/clutch.

As mentioned, the phrasing of these tags mirror *_birth tags with similar content, which generally seem to be tagged without many issues.
Searching 'group_birth multiple_birth', posts generally align with the definitions of both tags. Though I will admit there were two posts where I had to remove multiple_birth, but that

In regard to excessive_eggs you can have that without oviposition going on, this shouldn't be aliased to excessive oviposition.

Agreed, removed. I just saw that the two were heavily connected, but am thinking/seeing now that ovipositor posts apply as well-

Now as far as what might count as a excessive number of offspring that depends on both the species, average size of individuals of the species at maturity and whether they have offspring live born or in eggs.
[...]
Most species in reptiles, amphibians and fish will have offspring anywhere from a dozen to a 100. Insects in turn can reach over a 1000 at a time...
[...]
A specific number of eggs by the way is kinda useless when we have animal species such as the Kiwi Bird who can lay a single egg that is literally half its own body compared to frogs that can fit a dozen of their eggs on their backs for example..

I was thinking of adjusting the wiki to something like 'an absurd amount for the species' to clarify, but.. then that could lead to humans birthing eggs being tagged since 'one egg' is more than normal for the species.
Perhaps something along the lines of 'laying more eggs that considered reasonable for a character to have laid or carried'?

dirtyderg said:

• hyper birth -> hyper oviposition

How are hyperparsitoid style egg-laid-inside-an-egg images to be tagged if 'hyper' is being used for size? recursive_oviposition ? recursive_egg_insertion ?

centipedesexdoll said:
How are hyperparsitoid style egg-laid-inside-an-egg images to be tagged if 'hyper' is being used for size? recursive_oviposition ? recursive_egg_insertion ?

Yeah, based on existing terms here on e6, recursive_oviposition would probably be the best term imo.
Kinda like how recursive_pregnancy is used for pregnant... womb occupants? (Idk what term to use because some of those are definitely victims of unbirthing)