Gloom
09/06/13 12:18AM
Tag Discussions
Kielan: Remember to ask for Admin's permission before removing a tag entirely on mass, you might remove a valid tag by accident and get banned because you did not check first.

This thread is mainly for taggers, but everyone is free to join in. Here we will discuss all things related to tags and tagging.

Don't know what a tag means? Ask here.
Want to know how to search for certain things? Ask here.
Not sure if a certain tag is necessary? Discuss here.
Any ideas for a new tag? Discuss here.

No roleplaying please.

Other related threads:
forum #4259 - Pool discussions
forum #0084 - Meaning of some tags
(I'll add others if I find them.)

Edit: Just so we don't have to look for it every time, the ruling on intersex tags.
rule34.xxx/index.php?page...id=3193&pid=615#99055

Edit: We have a tag wiki now (sort of).
booru.wikia.com/wiki/Booru_Wikia
Gloom
09/06/13 12:20AM
str8_muscle
I've recently noticed this tag appearing on ~1100 images. At first glance, it seems to describe straight images with at least 1 muscular character in it. To me, this seems unnecessary since "straight muscles" would find the same type of image. Is this tag worth keeping or should we delete it?
Shaded_Cube
09/06/13 12:23AM
Gloom said:
I've recently noticed this tag appearing on ~1100 images. At first glance, it seems to describe straight images with at least 1 muscular character in it. To me, this seems unnecessary since "straight muscles" would find the same type of image. Is this tag worth keeping or should we delete it?


DisneyVillain, who also enters stuff like "stud", "beefcake", and "handsome".

The stuff the ToS says not to do. Tried removing them, but there's too much.
Gloom
09/06/13 12:27AM
Gloom said:
I've recently noticed this tag appearing on hundreds of images...

Shaded_Cube said:
DisneyVillain, who also enters stuff like "stud", "beefcake", and "handsome".

The stuff the ToS says not to do. Tried removing them, but there's too much.

He entered 500 in 1 day. He seems determined to get it in. Should we warn him about entering subjective tags (ie. "handsome" and "stud")?
Shaded_Cube
09/06/13 12:47AM
Gloom said:
He entered 500 in 1 day. He seems determined to get it in. Should we warn him about entering subjective tags (ie. "handsome" and "stud")?


Yes. Some others who aren't really making things better are...

Patreco- makes things confusing by tagging things like "trap", "crossdressing", "newhalf", "transgender" all at once.

VladSeville- tags everything as "hot" and "sexy". Made a tag called "naked_from_the_waist_down", which is the same thing as "bottomless" Removing that tag only resulted in getting put back.

resnux- Tag poisoning. Will give artist or character multiple tags. Some are even romanization or kanji. Oh, and has a seeming serious interracial fetish. Tried reporting him when after he removes all the tags from some uploads because I removed his tagging.
Gloom
09/06/13 03:09AM
no_humans
This tag appears on many furry images. I assume it means the images has no humans present. This tag is unnecessary since "-human" achieves the same result.
I won't name names, but I know who's entering it.
Shaded_Cube
09/06/13 03:32AM
Gloom said:
This tag appears on many furry images. I assume it means the images has no humans present. This tag is unnecessary since "-human" achieves the same result.
I won't name names, but I know who's entering it.


Yeah, I've never got that either when I see it on other boorus. It makes sense if it's Pokemon screnary.

gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=1546909

Just Pokemon being Pokemon. It might be because "human" isn't a regular tag there since it's expected. A place like e621 wouldn't use it because that's pretty much the point.
Gloom
09/06/13 05:56AM
Shaded_Cube said:
...It might be because "human" isn't a regular tag there since it's expected.

You'd think it would be, considering how many images contain them and many users prefer to see humans and nothing else. There must be at least 400000 images here containing humans, yet only ~18700 of them have the "human" tag.
Miss_Vulf
09/06/13 06:04AM
Gloom said:
Shaded_Cube said:
...It might be because "human" isn't a regular tag there since it's expected.

You'd think it would be, considering how many images contain them and many users prefer to see humans and nothing else. There must be at least 400000 images here containing humans, yet only ~18700 of them have the "human" tag.
Probably because it's generally assumed almost any character you're likely to see will be human. Sort of like how it's assumed that most characters will have skin and eyes and hair, so only specifics about those(blue_eyes, black_hair, beige_skin) or the lack of them (no_eyes, bald) are tagged.
Gloom
09/06/13 06:21AM
Gloom said:
You'd think it would be, considering how many images contain them and many users prefer to see humans and nothing else. There must be at least 400000 images here containing humans, yet only ~18700 of them have the "human" tag.

Miss_Vulf said:
Probably because it's generally assumed almost any character you're likely to see will be human. Sort of like how it's assumed that most characters will have skin and eyes and hair, so only specifics about those(blue_eyes, black_hair, beige_skin) or the lack of them (no_eyes, bald) are tagged.

I tend to avoid "no tags" (eg. "no_eyes", "no_humans") because they describe something that isn't there, and goes against the TWYS Rule. "bald" is an exception since it's considered a hairstyle.

To me, it would be better to add "human" to images that have humans than to add "no_humans" to images that don't. That way, users can find/avoid them the same way they would find/avoid everything else.
Shaded_Cube
09/06/13 06:52AM
Gloom said:
To me, it would be better to add "human" to images that have humans than to add "no_humans" to images that don't. That way, users can find/avoid them the same way they would find/avoid everything else.


I don't know, I agree with specifics.

If I were searching "my_little_pony human", I'd be looking for humanized or interspecies.

If I were searching "gundam human", I'd be looking for just about every character in the franchise.
Gloom
09/06/13 07:17AM
Gloom said:
To me, it would be better to add "human" to images that have humans than to add "no_humans" to images that don't. That way, users can find/avoid them the same way they would find/avoid everything else.

Shaded_Cube said:
I don't know, I agree with specifics.

If I were searching "my_little_pony human", I'd be looking for humanized or interspecies.

If I were searching "gundam human", I'd be looking for just about every character in the franchise.

In many franchises that will happen, but if you only tag some humans and not others, an open search for "human" wouldn't be able to find all of them.

For example, Misa Amane (a human) from Death Note (a anime/manga where most characters are human) appears in 185 images. How many of those have the "human" tag? Only 1 (because I tagged it). That means 184 images of this human won't appear if you search "human". Even worse, "death_note" has 732 images, most of which contain humans, and yet only 2 of them have "human" tagged (I tagged the other one, too).

This also means if a user wanted to search for Death Note characters that are not human (by searching "death_note -human"), most of the human images are going to appear anyway.

It would make more sense and cause less problems if we simply tag all humans as "human", regardless of what franchise they're from.
Shaded_Cube
09/06/13 08:30AM
Now that I think about it, that's probably why the others have "no_humans": To not tag everything.
Gloom
09/06/13 08:41AM
Shaded_Cube said:
Now that I think about it, that's probably why the others have "no_humans": To not tag everything.

Their strategy wouldn't have worked that well. On a site like this there's probably about as many non-human images as there are human ones.
Sabertooth_Titties
09/09/13 09:22PM
Would it be cosplay if the character is dressing up as a character from a TV series they star in?
1 2345>>>


Reply | Forum Index