Topic: [BUR] Missing Dragon aliases/implications

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

dfY6C

Privileged

The bulk update request #705 is pending approval.

create alias dragoness (354) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragonness (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragons (27) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragon_on_anthro (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragon_on_dragon (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragon_on_feral (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragon_prey (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragon_pred (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragon_boy (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragonboy (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias dragongirl (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias larger_dragon (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias smaller_dragon (0) -> dragon (7694)
create alias mobian_dragon (0) -> dragon (7694)
create implication dragon_naga (0) -> dragon (7694)
create implication dragon_naga (0) -> naga (154)
create implication fairy_dragon (2) -> dragon (7694)
create implication longma (0) -> dragon (7694)
create implication longma (0) -> chinese_mythology (0)
create implication longma (0) -> mythological_equine (64)
remove implication wyvern (167) -> dragon (7694)
create implication wyvern (167) -> western_dragon (1032)
create implication wyrm_(dragon) (2) -> european_mythology (16)
create implication dragon_(dnd) (0) -> dungeons_and_dragons (50)

Reason: This was prompted by seeing dragoness on several posts, so I went and ported these from e621 along the way. dragonness (Two Ns, potential misspelling version), dragon_boy, dragon_pred, and smaller_dragon are new aliases I included, based on some of the other existing aliases here.

You might notice dragon_girl is missing here. That one's currently in the invalid_tag corrections BUR.

dfY6C

Privileged

kalethorebiter said:
Kirins are not dragons

It's from e621, and the reason is this:

Having both species imply dragon (kirin and longma) as they are, by definition, dragon hybrids. Longma is a horse-dragon, so also implying mythological_equine. Kirin can't imply anything else, since it is variously depicted as a dragon mixed with either a horse, a deer, or occasionally an ox or goat.

I don't think that's necessarily wrong from a definition standpoint. "Dragon" can be quite different depending on the context, of course.

https://e621.net/forum_topics/31466?page=1#forum_post_391520

Updated

dfY6C

Privileged

I'll remove that line for now then, and if someone else feels more strongly about it later, then they can push for it.

dfy6c said:
I'll remove that line for now then, and if someone else feels more strongly about it later, then they can push for it.

I mean, I don't feel strongly one way or the other now. I searched to back my point and found nothing. Most sources goes to say they either look like, or are dragons