Fish, living and dead implications

BUR #15455 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication arowana -> fish
create implication moorish_idol -> fish
create implication grilled_fish -> fish_(food)
create implication grilled_eel -> fish_(food)
create implication ikura_(food) -> fish_(food)
create implication sashimi -> fish_(food)
create implication nigirizushi -> fish_(food)
create implication fried_fish -> fish_(food)
create implication fish_and_chips -> fish_(food)

First set are some fish lacking the fish tag. Some common fish like salmon are eaten and run the risk of causing the problem of accidentally tagging food. I dont think any of these guys have that problem as they arent eaten and several fish already have the implication.

On a related note, for the second set there is already a fish_(food) tag that is underpopulated, it covers all sorts of fish meals in various levels of preparation. Implying several of the popular fish dishes to it can help with tagging and help dissuade people from using the general fish tag for food.

Also, there is a pre-existing seafood tag, but seeing as how clams, shrimp, and other creatures that technically arent fish fall under that label i dont think its the best tag to use.

I don't think it's perfect, but with this and some manual work the fish tag can be cleaned up. If no one has any issues with this it I'll go through and remove the fish tag from relevant food posts and swap it with fish_(food.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

I think I tried to do too much with this BUR, but I still stand by the fact that post #6178140 and post #6129250 should not have the same tag apply to them. People looking for fish are looking for animals or tropical images, not food.

I still can't believe that tags like clownfish and angelfish aren't implied to fish yet. This is really a BUR that needs to go through.

One problem that comes to mind is for posts of distinguishable fish species being served as food ending up with both the fish and fish (food) tag, such as post #6203877 (sardine but also fish (food)).

However, imo it makes sense to have both fish and fish (food) apply to posts like these - they would not be unexpected in either search, because they depict both the food and the distinguishable fish, so anyone searching for either tag would get what they wanted.

Another problem is personifications, the same reason why, for example, we haven't traditionally implied races of dog like shiba inu to dog, but I'm not particularly convinced of that argument - I raised the issue in forum #228203 before. I'm approving this for now, if someone disagrees feel free to raise it in another topic so we can deal with that whole mess once and for all.

The bulk update request #15455 (forum #234674) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

BUR #16322 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication clownfish -> fish
create implication angelfish -> fish
create implication puffer_fish -> fish
create implication swordfish -> fish
create implication sunfish -> fish
create implication surgeonfish -> fish

Jumping off the previous BUR, these are all tags that have wikis that have been used around ~100+ times and are not typically fish that are eaten.

The bulk update request #16322 (forum #239018) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

The bulk update request #15455 (forum #234674) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

Had to remove the following because the BUR got stuck halfway, it processed these but not the rest:

imply seahorse -> fish
imply oarfish -> fish
imply anglerfish -> fish