[bulk] Christmas/Santa Implications

create implication santa_claus -> christmas

create implication santa_costume -> christmas
create implication black_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication blue_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication green_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication white_santa_costume -> santa_costume

create implication santa_boots -> santa_costume
create implication santa_hat -> santa_costume
create implication mini_santa_hat -> santa_hat

create implication christmas_tree -> christmas
create implication christmas_ornaments -> christmas
create implication christmas_lights -> christmas
create implication christmas_stocking -> christmas
create implication christmas_tree_costume -> christmas
create implication christmas_wreath -> christmas
create implication christmas_garland -> christmas

Link to request

All implications are related to the general concept of Christmas, or Santa Claus.

The first implication/set obviously implicates santa_claus to christmas.

The second set implicates various coloured Santa costumes to the main santa_costume tag, and by extension, christmas.

The third set implicates parts of santa_costume (boots, hat), and the type of hat (mini_santa_hat).

The fourth set implicates other various Christmas tags (at least the top 5, there's a few others that could be added as well) to christmas.

(Edited to add in stripped newlines.)
(Edit 2/Oct 18: Strikethrough removed implications in request)

create implication santa_claus -> christmas

Not entirely sure about this one.
It is possible that Santa Claus is depicted in a image without anything else referencing christmas (tree, lights, presents, gifts, etc...)
An example would be an image like post #1194795

I'm not sure if an image like that would still qualify for the christmas tag.

GabrielWB said:

Not entirely sure about this one.
It is possible that Santa Claus is depicted in a image without anything else referencing christmas (tree, lights, presents, gifts, etc...)
An example would be an image like post #1194795

I'm not sure if an image like that would still qualify for the christmas tag.

That could be true. I suppose that the bulk update could be edited to not have the first line at least.

Azuretan said:

create implication santa_claus -> christmas

create implication santa_costume -> christmas

create implication santa_boots -> santa_costume
create implication santa_hat -> santa_costume

create implication christmas_tree -> christmas
create implication christmas_ornaments -> christmas
create implication christmas_lights -> christmas
create implication christmas_stocking -> christmas
create implication christmas_tree_costume -> christmas
create implication christmas_wreath -> christmas
create implication christmas_garland -> christmas

-1 to all of these. Boots and/or hat alone does not make a Santa costume, and christmas is for a prominent Christmas theme, not the mere presence of an element. This was already discussed in topic #9982, so I don't know why you're pushing the same implications again two years later.

Hillside_Moose said:

-1 to all of these. Boots and/or hat alone does not make a Santa costume, and christmas is for a prominent Christmas theme, not the mere presence of an element. This was already discussed in topic #9982, so I don't know why you're pushing the same implications again two years later.

I actually completely forgot about that. My bad.

So for bulk implication alterations:

create implication black_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication blue_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication green_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication white_santa_costume -> santa_costume
create implication mini_santa_hat -> santa_hat

Would that be better?

Costume variations are implicated to the main santa_costume tag, and mini_santa_hat is implicated to santa_hat, being a variation as well.

(Request also updated.)

The bulk update request #381 has been approved.