Implicating veins -> vein.

Reason: Let me be clear: since it's a plural, I think it should imply vein. Many posts tagged with veins are tagged with vein already, but not all (not by a long shot). How can there be multiple veins visible when there is not one vein visible?

Disagree, should be aliased instead.

Alias veins <- vein.

I kind of disagree with aliasing vein to veins. It kinda ruins the purpose of searching for just one vein. Like. I know I heavilly dislike some overly hyper picture of a dick with like 5000 veins but I love a normal one with just one vein. I know it seems petty and allll but w/e ig

Plural vs. Singular.

Hurrduurr.

deletethis

Now honestly. How often do you hear of people talking of just one vein.

GreyMaria said:
Now honestly. How often do you hear of people talking of just one vein.

Well, there was that one time. It was an accident. I swear. the poor leach starved itself...

Hmmm, if there were only a few of one or the other, then I'd feed the smaller one to the bigger one to conserve e621's delicate food chain, but each one has like at least a thousand

I agree that one vein is meh, okay a bit not my thing but alright

Then I see more than one and it crosses the line for me

On the other hand, shouldn't we be consistent in the way we handle plurals?

Example: "trees" is aliased to "tree" (so I cannot search for images which contain only a single tree).

Another example: "nipple" is aliased to "nipples", so I cannot search for an image of a female with only a single nipple showing (or even only a single nipple due to surgical removal of one breast).

Final example: We have separate "veins" and "vein" tags (so I can search for images with both single veins and multiple veins).

Conclusion: We're using three different ways, pretty much arbitrarily, to deal with plural and singular versions of tags.