create implication ikazu_cirno -> cirno
create implication mizu_cirno -> cirno
create implication hapa_cirno -> cirno
If achi_cirno implies Cirno, the other three variations should do it as well.
Posted under Tags
create implication ikazu_cirno -> cirno
create implication mizu_cirno -> cirno
create implication hapa_cirno -> cirno
If achi_cirno implies Cirno, the other three variations should do it as well.
Log said:
None of these are anywhere near 50 posts. Ikazu is the only one with more than 10.
And because of this rule that has no real sense (why shouldn't an implication made to something, that has presence but is underused and has its wiki entris?)
Technical reason would be fine, but if there isn't one, I consider this rule as very...unneccessary.
Albert explained it from the technical side but I don't recall the exact terminology. Basically the more implications the more overhead it takes to check them all or something to that effect?
But frankly, what's the benefit to an implication for a tag that only gets used once a year? Wow you saved one person from adding one tag once.
Log said:
Albert explained it from the technical side but I don't recall the exact terminology. Basically the more implications the more overhead it takes to check them all or something to that effect?
But frankly, what's the benefit to an implication for a tag that only gets used once a year? Wow you saved one person from adding one tag once.
I don't know what's the benefit is. There are other tags that doesn't get used very often. This is a logic like when a camel enters your tent with only the head, it's in there with the whole body. So, what are with the tags that gets used only 10 times per year^^? It's not really good as a reason, since the border can vary.
Technical stuff is much more suited as a counter reason.