Try to req a Bulk but...

I try to request this changes but, is not posible to add two (or more) conditions to this case.

If some admin is interested here is my petition,
else, I try...

unimply cat_lingerie -> alternate_costume
imply (bat_cutout AND bra) -> adapted_costume
imply (bunny_cutout AND bra) -> adapted_costume
imply (frog_cutout AND bra) -> adapted_costume
imply (heart_cutout AND bra) -> adapted_costume
imply (mouse_cutout AND bra) -> adapted_costume
imply (whale_cutout AND bra) -> adapted_costume

Reason:
alternate_costume is more for an almost totally different from the original costume.
While adapted_costume is more suitable for costume with minor changes.

In this request all variants of cat_lingerie would be adapted_costume instead of alternate_costume and remove the latter tag for cat_lingerie, because cat_lingerie clearly is not an alternate_costume from around 780 post.

First off, cat lingerie doesn't imply alternate costume. Second, adapted costume doesn't work as the cat lingerie and such can be completely different from what the character usually wears. And third, implications don't work like that. You can't have a tag combination imply another tag. You can only have a single tag imply one other tag.

cat lingerie doesn't imply alternate costume.

Agreed. That's why I req. an unimply.

adapted costume doesn't work as the cat lingerie and such can be completely different from what the character usually wears

No, that alternate_costume is. Reading the wiki of both, adapted_costume is more appropriated for the variations.

Yesterday the search alternate_costume cat_lingerie trow around 780 results, today only 180 results. Someone maybe changes that. Thanks.

Requesting an unimply means ghat you're removing an implication. You cant unimply cat lingerie -> alternate costume because the implication doesn't exist.

As for adapted costume, that's implying that the cat lingerie has some traits of the original costume the character usually wears, but this isn't the case most of the time. Therefore, alternate costume would work better but that can't be an implication because there could be original characters out there whose sole costume is the cat lingerie and such apparel.

FinderX, the adapted costume tag isn't for variations in just any costume, it's for variations in the costume that a character wears all the time in their series.

Requesting an unimply means ghat you're removing an implication.

Now understood, so are permanent rules and not one use update.

the adapted costume tag isn't for variations in just any costume, it's for variations in the costume that a character wears all the time in their series.

So much confusion for this cat_lingerie, so maybe I can give up.

FinderX said:

So much confusion for this cat_lingerie, so maybe I can give up.

I don't see what is so confusing. If a character's cat lingerie is clearly patterned after their default outfit (post #2268786, for instance), it's adapted costume. If the lingerie looks nothing like the default outfit (post #2262430), it isn't.

Just remember that adapted costume is based on what the character normally wears. It has nothing to do with alternate versions of fashion memes.

iridescent_slime said:

Just remember that adapted costume is based on what the character normally wears. It has nothing to do with alternate versions of fashion memes.

It can be a variation of any particular outfit. Why exclude fashion memes? And if so, just what are they going to be tagged with? I already brought this up (with regard to "cat lingerie" costumes that feature cutouts of non-cat animals) in topic #12490, so far with one agreement and no objections.

He wants cat lingerie to imply adapted costume, or rather, alternate costume, though, which doesn't work at all.

EB said:

It can be a variation of any particular outfit. Why exclude fashion memes? And if so, just what are they going to be tagged with? I already brought this up (with regard to "cat lingerie" costumes that feature cutouts of non-cat animals) in topic #12490, so far with one agreement and no objections.

Your interpretation of the tag appears to be at odds with its wiki, then. And broadening its usage in this way just adds false positives for anyone searching for adapted versions of character's canonical outfits.

iridescent_slime said:

Your interpretation of the tag appears to be at odds with its wiki, then. And broadening its usage in this way just adds false positives for anyone searching for adapted versions of character's canonical outfits.

I don't know why it would add false positives since this is a catchall term and the cat lingerie tag (i.e. cat keyhole bra) is the most prominent type of them and because of this trend, there exist so many other animal themed lingeries and therefore it is an adapted costume of a costume that isn't bound to a character.
You want to say, if the costume isn't bound to a xharacter but a mere trend, it shouldn't be tagged adapted costume. That's a bit short in my opinion since there are so many missing pieces then.

tapnek said:

He wants cat lingerie to imply adapted costume, or rather, alternate costume, though, which doesn't work at all.

I don't see where he wanted this. It looks like he only wants adapted costume on images that are "adaptations" of the basic cat lingerie outfit with different animal cutouts like a bat cutout or bunny cutout. That should be perfectly fine. But the kind of implications he's requesting are not technically possible. Even if they were, it wouldn't be an implication I agree with since there could potentially be an animal cutout bra that is not at all based on the cat lingerie outfit.