I'm not sure if it's so distinctively Japanese to warrant aliasing to akanbe, but eh.
Posted under General
There's a bit of a problem with this alias since topic #10682 was approved. What if it's an eyelid pull without the tongue sticking out as in post #2301899? My thought was that should still be considered akanbe, in which case the alias from topic #10682 should be nixed. If it's not ("akanbe" must have a tongue out), though, then the alias from this topic should be removed, and akanbe should imply eyelid_pull instead.
As it stands now, things like post #3243783 can't be correctly tagged. I think separate tags are probably not needed here, but the unimplication needs to be done first before the alias is reversed.
EDIT: This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.
EDIT: This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.
Updated by DanbooruBot
Any reasons not to remove the alias and implication? For the sake of accurate tagging, there's really only two solutions that work (and the request needs to be done before moving towards either of them):
1) Ditch the implication and reverse the alias to akanbe->eyelid_pull. "Akanbe" could then be searched with eyelid_pull tongue_out.
2) Ditch the alias and implicate akanbe to both tongue_out and eyelid_pull. This means more tags around but could avoid false positives from the search mentioned in the first solution (I'd think they would be pretty rare though).