The bulk update request #10848 is active.

Reason: I've noticed the isopod and decapod tags weren't using the English names, even though they had them (and isopod was even aliased to isopoda), and then dove deeper and found some things that don't feel like they should be happening. EDIT: Upon closer inspection, it seems to be due to the fact that the 'decapod' tag is already being used to describe characters with 10 pairs of limbs. I believe this should instead be done with the tag 10_legs, however.

Most noticeably hermit crabs are decapods, but not all of them are marine. This means decapods cannot imply marine. Some hermit crabs are terrestrial throughout their entire adult lives and only are aquatic in their larval stages, like the coconut crab.

On a side note, something I am not touching here but I think isn't the worst thing to consider - currently, 'true_crab' is aliased to 'crab', but I think having the brachyuran crabs tagged as 'true_crab' wouldn't go amiss. There have been posts in the forums about coconut crabs implying 'crab', which with how the tag is used cannot be done but the confusion is understandable.

Follow up once this goes through

alias isopoda -> isopod
imply giant_isopod -> isopod
imply tongue-eating_louse -> isopod
imply woodlouse -> isopod
alias decapoda -> decapod
imply caridean_shrimp -> marine
imply crab -> marine
imply king_crab -> marine
imply crayfish -> marine
imply lobster -> marine
imply squat_lobster -> marine

EDIT: The bulk update request #10848 (forum #444955) has been approved by @spe.

The bulk update request #10849 is pending approval.

create implication prawn (30) -> decapod (2041)
create implication prawn (30) -> shrimp (586)
create implication giant_tiger_prawn (1) -> prawn (30)
create alias prawn_(food) (2) -> shrimp_(food) (111)
create implication shrimp_(food) (111) -> food (164063)

Reason: And to get into the more granular tags - part 1: Prawns

So the wiki page claims claimed prawns are a synonym of shrimp, which is half true. They're often used as that, but there's a group that's very specifically called prawns and that's Dendrobranchiata. I already edited the wiki page to explain that.

As for the food alias, I dare you to differentiate cooked prawn and shrimp in accordance to TWYS.

The bulk update request #10853 is pending approval.

Reason: Part 2: Shrimps

- Coral shrimps are non-caridean
- Pistol shrimps, otherwise snapping shrimps, ARE caridean
- Cleaner shrimps aren't... really a thing? It's an ecological niche, not a taxonomical group. Shrimp in this niche aren't all caridean either, so I can't alias them to that
- Tiger_shrimp is a tag we have, but there isn't an animal called that. There's a Spiny Tiger Shrimp (Phyllognathia ceratophthalma) and a Giant Tiger Prawn (Penaeus monodon), but the posts with the tag don't strike me as either

The bulk update request #10854 is pending approval.

create implication sweet_home_alabama_cave_crayfish (1) -> crayfish (34)
create implication lobster_humanoid (13) -> lobster (285)
create implication kaua'i_cave_amphipod (1) -> amphipod (2)
create implication yeti_crab (1) -> decapod (2041)
create implication yeti_crab (1) -> marine (149046)
create implication spotted_porcelain_crab (1) -> porcelain_crab (0)
create implication porcelain_crab (0) -> decapod (2041)
create implication porcelain_crab (0) -> marine (149046)
create implication slipper_lobster (1) -> decapod (2041)
create implication slipper_lobster (1) -> marine (149046)
create implication spiny_lobster (2) -> decapod (2041)
create implication spiny_lobster (2) -> marine (149046)

Reason: Part 3: Crayfish, Lobsters, Isopods, Amphipods, and other assorted weirdos

The bulk update request #10855 is pending approval.

Reason: Part 4: crabs

Followup needed:

alias portunid -> swimming_crab
imply swimming_crab -> crab
alias calappid -> box_crab
imply box_crab -> crab
imply calappa_(crab) -> box_crab
alias ocypodid -> ocypodid_crab
imply ocypodid_crab -> crab
imply fiddler_crab -> ocypodid_crab
imply flower_crab -> swimming_crab
imply crucifix_crab -> swimming_crab

The bulk update request #10856 is pending approval.

create alias land_crab (3) -> grapsoid_crab (0)
create implication samurai_crab (1) -> crab (1600)
create implication coral_guard_crab (1) -> crab (1600)
create implication horsehair_crab (1) -> crab (1600)
create implication dungeness_crab (1) -> crab (1600)
create implication tiger_face_crab (1) -> crab (1600)
create implication cancrocaeca_xenomorpha (1) -> crab (1600)

Reason: Part 4.5: There's too many crabs

The reason I am aliasing land crabs to grapsoid crabs is because the term "land crab" is indeed a name used for one of the grapsoid crab families, but also extremely ambiguous, and almost all grapsoid crabs have a similar enough body structure to where I think grouping them at superfamily level is acceptable.

And apparently there's also the entirety of this left to tag, most of which seem to be labeled to species level, but excuse me if I say I want to wait with it until after the above go through and isopod tagging is able to be done properly.

The bulk update request #10848 (forum #444955) has been approved by @spe.

bugabond said:

implicate prawn -> marine
implicate coral_shrimp -> marine

These would be redundant if shrimp already implies marine. Also I think it’ll actually block the BUR if I tried to approve it.

bugabond said:

implicate crab -> marine

Wouldn’t this conflict with:

bugabond said:

hermit crabs are decapods, but not all of them are marine. This means decapods cannot imply marine.

Side note: someone should probably clear prawn of mistags before adding implications. Notably, there appears to be a Muppets character named "king prawn" that doesn’t actually look anything like a shrimp as far as I can tell. Not sure what he’s actually supposed to be, but those were probably tagged according to the name regardless of actual species.

spe said:
These would be redundant if shrimp already implies marine. Also I think it’ll actually block the BUR if I tried to approve it.

It would indeed. I didn't notice this issue. I think I have a similar problem with the caridean shrimp in the followup, I'll get to it right away. EDIT: Resolved

spe said:
Wouldn’t this conflict with:

It would not, since the crab tag is used explicitly for true crabs (Brachyura) whereas hermit crabs don't belong to it. This is why I talked about renaming crab to true_crab above, since people get confused about that very often. HOWEVER, there are actually terrestrial species of Brachyurans among grapsoid crabs (which I learned yesterday), so this implication should likely not happen regardless. But also I am extremely hesitant to instead have every single granular crab tag imply marine separately. Not sure what to do here.

spe said:
Side note: someone should probably clear prawn of mistags before adding implications. Notably, there appears to be a Muppets character named "king prawn" that doesn’t actually look anything like a shrimp as far as I can tell. Not sure what he’s actually supposed to be, but those were probably tagged according to the name regardless of actual species.

I did notice that the muppet character dominates the tag, but I wasn't sure if he's actually a prawn or not. I am not too deep in the muppet lore, unfortunately. EDIT: I replaced it with the food tag where appropriate, and replaced one instance with ambient_shrimp since the actual crustacean was just a small symbol in the corner. I am not entirely comfortable editing the muppet posts, though.

The bulk update request #10874 is pending approval.

create alias isopoda (214) -> isopod (0)
create implication isopod (0) -> malacostracan (2325)
create implication giant_isopod (22) -> isopod (0)
create implication tongue-eating_louse (13) -> isopod (0)
create implication woodlouse (155) -> isopod (0)
create alias decapoda (1906) -> decapod (2041)
create implication king_crab (5) -> marine (149046)
create implication crayfish (34) -> marine (149046)
create implication lobster (285) -> marine (149046)
create implication squat_lobster (4) -> marine (149046)

Reason: Follow up to #10848