[BULK] Tank Implications

BUR #8248 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication mark_iv_tank -> tank
create implication elefant -> tank
create implication jagdtiger -> tank
create implication special_type_2_launch_ka-mi -> tank
create implication t-26 -> tank
create implication ft-17 -> tank
create implication s35 -> tank
create implication arl-44 -> tank
create implication m26_pershing -> tank
create implication type_97_te-ke -> tank

I noticed that the FT-17 post count was pretty high, with a lot of posts missing the tank tag. This adds an implication for that, and also the remaining tanks from the prominent high schools of Girls und Panzer.

There might be other tanks that could use an implication as well, so feel free to chime-in and/or edit the BUR.

Disagree. This may cause issues for original anthropomorphized tank girls down the line. As well as weird modified or military mashup machines like in post #4448094. We avoid doing implications for specific weapon tags (e.g. named swords to sword) for similar reasons.

There are some tanks that already get implications to tank, but this is causing issues as seen under a tank personification search.

There isn't an issue as far as I can see. Just use another tag other than the name for the tank: for example, M4_sherman_(personification). This is already being done for over a hundred other tags of similar nature. It's my opinion that personifications of specific named items like vehicles and weapons should never be tagged with the weapon/vehicle in question unless that weapon/vehicle also appears in the same image.

As it stands, without an implication, we are left with dozens upon dozens of posts which are not tagged with tank, and the problem will only get worse and worse as time goes forward. This is exactly the reason why we have implications. I certainly will not be gardening this, and it really degrades the search capability to have such a shortcoming.

That being said, when did we start not doing these kinds of implications? It would be like not implicating chocolate_cake to cake because someone might make a gacha where all the characters are pastries and therefore the cake tag would be incorrect. Wouldn't we just tag it personification and the thing its personifying?

thelieutenant said:

That being said, when did we start not doing these kinds of implications? It would be like not implicating chocolate_cake to cake because someone might make a gacha where all the characters are pastries and therefore the cake tag would be incorrect. Wouldn't we just tag it personification and the thing its personifying?

That's true, we'd have to stop implicating gun types too if we wanted to actually do something about this. The same argument can be applied to pretty much any umbrella tag.

The bulk update request #8248 (forum #202300) has been approved by @nonamethanks.