The tag alias #71838 tank -> tank_(disambiguation) is pending approval.

Reason: There are many things "tank" can refer to: the military vehicle, a canister of gas, a fish tank, or short for tank top, to name a few

Get rid of the implications first before aliasing, wouldn't want a disambiguation tag being implied and implying things. Also change category to invalid after the alias

The tag as it is currently used refers to the vehicle, so I believe the tag should be mass updated to tank_(vehicle) (following the trend of truck_(vehicle) (wait why is truck separate from it and why does truck need the suffix)), and have the implications ported there too

The bulk update request #9015 is pending approval.

change category tank_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid
mass update tank -> tank_(vehicle)
remove implication tank (1309) -> vehicle (48246)
remove implication living_tank (158) -> tank (1309)
create implication tank_(vehicle) (0) -> vehicle (48246)
create implication living_tank (158) -> tank_(vehicle) (0)

Reason: As per @SNPtheCat's suggestion, approve this first before disambiguation.

Edit: Added new suggestions from below.

Don't forget
unimply tank -> vehicle imply tank_(vehicle) -> vehicle imply living_tank -> tank_(vehicle)

thegreatwolfgang said:
The bulk update request #9015 is pending approval.

change category tank_(disambiguation) (0) -> invalid
mass update tank -> tank_(vehicle)
remove implication tank (1309) -> vehicle (48246)
remove implication living_tank (158) -> tank (1309)
create implication tank_(vehicle) (0) -> vehicle (48246)
create implication living_tank (158) -> tank_(vehicle) (0)

Reason: As per @SNPtheCat's suggestion, approve this first before disambiguation.

Edit: Added new suggestions from below.

Do you think we'd be better off wrapping it all into 1 BUR?

curiousoxide said:
Do you think we'd be better off wrapping it all into 1 BUR?

Maybe? Last I checked BURs do not follow the sequence that the script is written in.
You could end up with the alias happening before the mass update and potentially causing problems.

BURs do not follow the sequence the script is written in. It will lead to a lot of trouble, and you'll need a second BUR anyway to fix the mess, plus it'll take a while for the fix to be approved. Best get it right the first time round.