Does e621 support multiple tags being implied to one tag?

For example, feral + female + solo -> female_feral

I tried searching for it but couldn't find an answer

Nope.

Unfortunately no. At best you could have a bot that checks for posts with the multiple tags and automatically add the one it implies, but you'd have to be sure it's always applicable. You may also need special permission from the site staff to run such a bot.

There is really no way for this to work unless we get character specific tag grouping. Not every post that contains both female and feral in it has female ferals, because post with male feral and female anthro would also be tagged as female and feral.

walkingspaghett said:
Does e621 support multiple tags being implied to one tag?

It does if you do it the other way around, i.e., tag_A implies tag_B + tag_C.
E.g., male_penetrating_female -> male_penetrating + female_penetrated

For example, feral + female + solo -> female_feral

I tried searching for it but couldn't find an answer

On the other hand, this sounds like you are trying to make tag_A + tag_B imply tag_C.
In other words, automate the tagging of specific tags based on existing tags on the post, which is going to be a terrible idea.

For example, if posts tagged with feral + female + solo are to automatically imply female_feral, what would happen is that it would catch a lot of false positives.
Such as, (ambient_fish) feral + (anthro) female + solo --> female_feral (??).

walkingspaghett said:
Does e621 support multiple tags being implied to one tag?

For example, feral + female + solo -> female_feral

I tried searching for it but couldn't find an answer

multiple scenes, tf, and other stuff could cause situations like this to not be true, so we cannot have implications like this work anyway if we wanted to.

thegreatwolfgang said:
It does if you do it the other way around, i.e., tag_A implies tag_B + tag_C.
E.g., male_penetrating_female -> male_penetrating + female_penetrated

On the other hand, this sounds like you are trying to make tag_A + tag_B imply tag_C.
In other words, automate the tagging of specific tags based on existing tags on the post, which is going to be a terrible idea.

For example, if posts tagged with feral + female + solo are to automatically imply female_feral, what would happen is that it would catch a lot of false positives.
Such as, (ambient_fish) feral + (anthro) female + solo --> female_feral (??).

Yeah I wasn't thinking of tags for the background, maybe if tags related to the background had their own section like "meta" it could work but it makes sense for that to not happen as this is probably too specific and wouldn't be used often

thegreatwolfgang said:
For example, if posts tagged with feral + female + solo are to automatically imply female_feral, what would happen is that it would catch a lot of false positives.
Such as, (ambient_fish) feral + (anthro) female + solo --> female_feral (??).

Would you tag feral for ambient creatures? AFAIK, we shouldn't tag form or gender for ambient creatures since they're not counted for characters.

dba_afish said:
multiple scenes, tf, and other stuff could cause situations like this to not be true, so we cannot have implications like this work anyway if we wanted to.

TF wouldn't be a problem. If a female character is transforming to/from being a feral, then female_feral should be just as applicable as feral itself.

The multiple scenes thing could be an issue, but this is one of the reasons why I don't like divvying up character count by "scene", rather than the post as a whole.

watsit said:
TF wouldn't be a problem. If a female character is transforming to/from being a feral, then female_feral should be just as applicable as feral itself.

gender_transformation

dba_afish said:
gender_transformation

Fair enough.

watsit said:
Would you tag feral for ambient creatures? AFAIK, we shouldn't tag form or gender for ambient creatures since they're not counted for characters.

While generally not counted towards character count, I don't see why not when it is applicable.
For example, a character swimming underwater with semi-detailed marine life in the background (e.g., post #1972329).

Obviously, certain restraints do apply if their shape or form are too ambiguous to make out, in which case no form would be tagged.

watsit said:
Would you tag feral for ambient creatures? AFAIK, we shouldn't tag form or gender for ambient creatures since they're not counted for characters.

I generally don't, since I don't think it's at all helpful for searching or blacklisting. It would be actively harmful I think if ambient_bird was caught by something like a feral -rating:s blacklist.