imply simple_wings -> wings

BUR #25867 is pending approval.

create implication simple_wings -> wings

Implication for new tag.

Reading the wiki it seems somewhat sensible, but looking at how it's populated I have no idea what the criteria are supposed to be, there's a ton of different levels of detail in there, many of which I would in no way call "simple".

I don't hate the idea of a tag for wings like post #7230946 or post #7235165, but the tag as it currently stands is a mish-mash of wings like it and wings I personally would not consider "simple". What the hell was something like post #6692171 doing in that tag?

IF it exists it should be implicated.

Looks like a bad tag though and just Mini Wings 2.0.

Knowledge_Seeker said:

What the hell was something like post #6692171 doing in that tag?

It looks to me like the basic idea is that the wings look like simple geometric shapes. For that post, the outer parts of the wings might pass based on such a criterion, though the other parts and the patterns increase the complexity too much for any other definition of simple. Perhaps flat wings would be a better name.

The real offender in my opinion is post #7508052. I don't know if it's detailed enough for feathered wings, but it's definitely too detailed for a tag called simple wings.

BUR #25893 is pending approval.

mass update favgroup:31948 -> cartoon_wings
nuke Simple_wings

I'll admit I was wrong. This isn't mini_wings 2.0 because actually there isn't a clear theme here, but I think we can salvage something of this concept. post #7442027 and post #6348615 are real head-scratchers.

This proposed favgroup is only for the round bottomed spirally kind found in post #7230946. I chose cartoon_wings since they aren't realistic and sometimes aren't flat but I'm open to suggestions.

I need to finally go through the halo tag anyway so while I'm at it why not group these together?

@War6t2 wtf are you doing

Nameless_Contributor said:

@War6t2 wtf are you doing

Holy cow. You can't manually mass remove tags from a copyright. I understand what you're doing with Mystica but you're accidentally removing feathered wings from relevant posts like post #1063737.

Bird wings is probably a discussion worth having.

I'm mass reverting those edits.

zetsubousensei said:

Holy cow. You can't manually mass remove tags from a copyright. I understand what you're doing with Mystica but you're accidentally removing feathered wings from relevant posts like post #1063737.

Hmm... Deja vu...

zetsubousensei said:

Bird wings is probably a discussion worth having.

I see no reason not to tag the Mystia Lorelei posts with bird wings. Even if those wings aren't found on any real-life bird species (and I don't know enough about birds to know for sure), they still look pretty bird-like to me.

I see no reason not to tag the Mystia Lorelei posts with bird wings. Even if those wings aren't found on any real-life bird species (and I don't know enough about birds to know for sure), they still look pretty bird-like to me.

As someone who does know a fair share about birds, Mystia's wings seem to be vaguely based off those of real world sparrows, but the keyword there is "vaguely" unless you occasionally find an artist who decides to draw her with more realistic wings. But expecting semi-realistic bird wings on every birdlike character like she is on a site where pink hair is a dime-a-dozen is just plain silly in my opinion, and I see no reason why she shouldn't be tagged with bird wings if such a tag is to exist.