The tag implication #47452 gold_chain -> chain has been approved.

Reason: A gold chain is, by definition, a chain.

EDIT: The tag implication gold_chain -> chain (forum #350361) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

+1

Also, you can use the 'Request BUR' function next time you will make multiple implications/aliases, if you want to. 👍

monsterbomb10010 said:
+1

Also, you can use the 'Request BUR' function next time you will make multiple implications/aliases, if you want to. 👍

True. Tbh, I started with the first one and thought each additional topic would be “the last one” and then that just kinda kept happening, lol.

It's a fair thing to wonder about. But I feel like if it's enough of a chain to tag it gold_chain then it's also enough to tag it with chain. If the chain on a necklace doesn't look enough like a chain, then it can just use the existing gold_necklace tag instead. And that's probably true with or without this implication to chain.

But gold chains are not always jewelry, so an implication with necklace or bracelet wouldn't work because there are images with golden bondage chains or just dramatically hanging from the ceiling for aesthetics too.

Although I agree that there is quite a difference (sometimes) between the appearance of jewelry chains vs practical chains... that same range of styles/purposes is common in both gold chain and the regular old chain tag, so it won't introduce anything to the tag if they are implicated. And smaller tags exist to differentiate some of the different styles or purposes of chains, so that people can narrow it down a bit if needed. Which seems like a good enough way to deal with it.

So I think this implication of gold_chain to -> chain will work. fwiw

The tag implication gold_chain -> chain (forum #350361) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.