[REJECTED] Railing implications

create implication leaning_against_railing -> railing
create implication leaning_against_railing -> leaning_on_object

Link to request

Subset of both, but at least the first implication.

Possible question: What about fences etc.?

EDIT: This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1283 (forum #135705) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

There's an against fence tag so that shouldn't be an issue. There seem to be a few cases where leaning against railing is used for fences, which I'll clear up now.

Does railing count as an object? I would have thought it was part of the scenery like tree or wall.

ion288 said:

Does railing count as an object? I would have thought it was part of the scenery like tree or wall.

We could make it like this.

1. Objects are things that are moveable and not fix located in one place (walls, railings, trees)
2. Objects are all inanimate things, this does still exclude trees.

I wasn't aware leaning against railing was a tag. Shouldn't it be aliased to against railing? This tag is older, more populated, and fits the same template as against wall, against glass, etc.

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.

The bulk update request #1283 (forum #135705) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

mass update leaning_against_railing -> against_railing leaning_on_object

Link to request

Tag is superfluous but I dont think it needs to bee aliased. Looking through the leaning on object tag I find quite a few examples of leaning on railings and fences so it should apply.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1656 (forum #146490) has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.

The bulk update request #1656 (forum #146490) has been approved by @Hillside_Moose.