imply tooth_necklace -> necklace

BUR #8900 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication tooth_necklace -> necklace

A tooth necklace is a type of necklace.

Wouldn't it have been better to have named the tag like fang necklace instead of tooth necklace? Especially given how we use the teeth tag, it'd give the impression a tooth necklace would be composed of human teeth instead of animal fangs.

ive only ever heard them called tooth necklaces and fang necklace only has 2% of the google results of tooth necklace

It's not necessarily a fair comparison in search, especially because your results also includes human teeth necklaces. But another thing that should be pointed out, those necklaces are also frequently made out of claws as well and aren't limited to animal teeth.

Why move the tag from a generic term to a more specific one when tooth_necklace already gets the point across just fine? If someone uploads a post with a shark-tooth (not fangs) necklace, will we need a separate tag just for that? This seems like a really nitpicky thing to get hung up on when "tooth necklace" is perfectly understandable.

The bulk update request #8900 (forum #205670) has been approved by @nonamethanks.