NOTE: I don't know how to actually properly request the removal of a tag implication. Please help.

Reason: nipple_piercing should not imply nipples because the piercing can be visible while the nipple is not.

There are several posts that incorrectly have nipples tagged because of this erroneous implication.

Examples:
post #5597450 post #2821518 post #2868752 post #3614071 post #5557513

That last one is particularly egregious. There is no hint of a nipple there!

The quickest way to find more examples is to search for "nipple_piercing areola_slip". Obviously that doesn't get all affected posts.

Keep in mind:

• areola is a separate thing from nipples.
• nipple_outline, which is often tagged in the affected posts, does not imply nipples.

ichhabs said:
NOTE: I don't know how to actually properly request the removal of a tag implication. Please help.

Reason: nipple_piercing should not imply nipples because the piercing can be visible while the nipple is not.

There are several posts that incorrectly have nipples tagged because of this erroneous implication.

Examples:
post #5597450 post #2821518 post #2868752 post #3614071 post #5557513

That last one is particularly egregious. There is no hint of a nipple there!

The quickest way to find more examples is to search for "nipple_piercing areola_slip". Obviously that doesn't get all affected posts.

Keep in mind:

• areola is a separate thing from nipples.
• nipple_outline, which is often tagged in the affected posts, does not imply nipples.

Request BUR
In the script box: Unimply tag1 -> tag2

The bulk update request #11457 is pending approval.

remove implication nipple_piercing (116931) -> nipples (1416001)

Reason: makes sense, you can see nipple piercings through clothes, such as with nipple outlines, which would make this implication not always valid.

manitka said:
The bulk update request #11457 is pending approval.

remove implication nipple_piercing (116931) -> nipples (1416001)

Reason: makes sense, you can see nipple piercings through clothes, such as with nipple outlines, which would make this implication not always valid.

by this logic, shouldn't nearly all similar piercing implications be undone?