The tag implication #44177 solo_scalie_breasts -> non-mammal_breasts has been rejected.

Reason: Hm, I wonder if implication combined from several tags is supported...

Anyway, the "non-mammal_breasts" tag is woefully underutilised right now. I propose to implicate that if we have a picture that has
1) One (and only one) character (tag "solo")
2) and that character is a scalie (tag "scalie")
3) and that character has breasts (tag "breasts")
- said breasts should be considered non-mammal. For obvious reasons.

EDIT: The tag implication solo_scalie_breasts -> non-mammal_breasts (forum #333470) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

This is not how tag implications work, and transformation sequences regularly get tagged as solo, as such that it's possible for the same character to have breasts then be a reptile, but not both at the same time.

Best way to increase the tag’s usage would be with a tagging project such as at https://tagme.dev - unfortunately, multiple tags together cannot imply anything, and there are things that will slip through this result regardless, so even a tag script wouldn’t be ideal.

The tag implication solo_scalie_breasts -> non-mammal_breasts (forum #333470) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.