Implicating voluptuous → wide_hips
Link to implication

Reason:

Also: voluptuous -> big_breasts

Both of these qualities need to be visible on a character for them to qualify as voluptuous and the larger breasts tags imply the smaller ones, so they'd be tagged with big_breasts regardless.

EDIT: The tag implication voluptuous -> wide_hips (forum #190598) has been rejected by @Millcore.

hips won't always be visible though, right? Implicating based on a tag's definition relies on the accuracy of the users tagging it.

There's plenty of images on e621 where only the upper half or lower half of a character is highlighted. This implication wouldn't work because it's assuming too much.

Besides, voluptuous male solo is also a thing.

Some of the mistags are likely caused by the curvy -> voluptuous alias.

The alias should probably be moved to curvaceous.

Related:

forum #5300 - Usage: wide_hips tag (Jun. 2010)

[LOOK AT THE DATE BEFORE REPLYING TO THAT]

forum #189069 - Tag Alias: curvaceous -> voluptuous (Apr. 2016)

The tag implication voluptuous -> wide_hips (forum #190598) has been rejected by @Millcore.