The bulk update request #1248 is active.

create implication cervical_knotting (9) -> knotting (29009)
create implication sheath_knotting (38) -> knotting (29009)
create implication slit_knotting (128) -> knotting (29009)

Reason: Other *_knotting tags imply knotting.

I was going to add imply cervical_knotting -> cervical_penetration, but apparently other *_knotting tags imply * rather than *_penetration. For example:

• anal_knotting implies anal but not anal_penetration;

• oral_knotting implies oral but not oral_penetration;

• vaginal_knotting implies vaginal but not vaginal_penetration;

Is there a particular reason for this? I assume knotting would logically imply penetration. In addition, there is no cervical tag.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1248 (forum #315702) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

gattonero2001 said:
Is there a particular reason for this? I assume knotting would logically imply penetration.

It sure is logical and the requests have already been created but it's been over 3 years and they're still unanswered.

Tag Implication: anal_knotting -> anal_penetration
Tag Implication: vaginal_knotting -> vaginal_penetration
Tag Implication: oral_knotting -> oral_penetration

The bulk update request #1249 is active.

remove implication anal_knotting (8302) -> anal (450998)
remove implication cloacal_knotting (96) -> cloacal (4279)
remove implication vaginal_knotting (7916) -> vaginal (427118)
create implication anal_knotting (8302) -> anal_penetration (371804)
create implication cervical_knotting (9) -> cervical_penetration (5541)
create implication cloacal_knotting (96) -> cloacal_penetration (3298)
create implication oral_knotting (2415) -> oral_penetration (106939)
create implication sheath_knotting (38) -> sheath_penetration (567)
create implication slit_knotting (128) -> slit_penetration (2390)
create implication vaginal_knotting (7916) -> vaginal_penetration (327193)
create implication urethral_knotting (117) -> urethral_penetration (10739)

Reason: I assume that for knotting to occur penetration would logically be required.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1249 (forum #315736) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

A similar BUR that I feel is worth revisiting - topic #27933.

The bulk update request #3329 is pending approval.

create implication ambiguous_knotting (146) -> knotting (29009)
create implication dildo_knotting (248) -> knotting (29009)

Reason: Another *_knottings that should be implicated.

I was about to include urethral_knotting as well but noticed that someone had already requested an implication for it - see topic #24919

Keep the dildos away from my knots and knotting.

aobird said:
Keep the dildos away from my knots and knotting.

Well, the wikis for anal_knotting, vaginal_knotting and others clearly say it can be done either by a penis or a sex toy, so why not?

If anyone has objections to the BURs in this topic, please state them within 10 hours

ㅤimply urethral_knotting -> urethral_penetration is missing

waydence said:
ㅤimply urethral_knotting -> urethral_penetration is missing

Added, thank you for pointing out

The bulk update request #1248 (forum #315702) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #1249 (forum #315736) has been approved by @gattonero2001.