General Tag Discussion
Background Pony #52BA
There are some tags (genital anatomy) that don’t actually imply “explicit”, but are very often a qualifier for an image being “explicit”. There are several hundred images currently that have the tags and aren’t tagged as “explicit” and need review:
penis
balls
vulva
penis
balls
vulva
- They might be outright mis-tagged, such as if someone mis-clicked on the suggestion dropdown or copied tags from an alternate version and didn’t catch everything that needed changing
- A tagger might not have looked closely enough at the image and just assumed something was visible when it really wasn’t, due to the pose or having a featureless crotch
- There might be some other tag that would have been correct instead, and the tagger just didn’t know, such as a dildo not being a penis (or a horsecock dildo not being a horsecock), or a phallic symbol or penis drawing, or cameltoe instead of vulva, etc.
- They might need to be re-rated “explicit”
Background Pony #52BA
The tag five seconds or less was used by essentially one person 6 years ago, and is obsoleted by being able to search/filter by duration, so I think it could be nuked.
Background Pony #F906
The tags
elsagate and youtube kids shit seem basically synonymous. Background Pony #F906
The tag
human vagina on pony doesn’t align with the tag definitions for vagina and vulva.
LightningBolt 
![Thread Starter - [NO SPOILER, LEAK-FREE] Season 8 Discussion and Speculation: Discovery Family airings](https://derpicdn.net/badges/2017/7/2/0bd59d4eff9c3aeaad.svg "Thread Starter - [NO SPOILER, LEAK-FREE] Season 8 Discussion and Speculation: Discovery Family airings")
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@djpup3
Well you kind of populated the tag yourself, and truthfully a lot of those just have trans flags in the image and that doesn’t indicate what a character is.
Well you kind of populated the tag yourself, and truthfully a lot of those just have trans flags in the image and that doesn’t indicate what a character is.
You also completely made the second tag 100% yourself.
Might I suggest asking for feedback or if it’s good to make a tag before doing/populating it? This thread is for that as much if not more so. Tags should be made to serve a purpose not just because someone felt like making them.
Dragonpone 
Moderator
Badge Dragon
@Background Pony #52BA
Ye, tagged.
Ye, tagged.
@Background Pony #52BA
Before checking I assumed the name referred to the amount of time to make the image, but even that would unnecessary since we’ve got the X second/minute challenge tags. Seems fine to remove.
Before checking I assumed the name referred to the amount of time to make the image, but even that would unnecessary since we’ve got the X second/minute challenge tags. Seems fine to remove.
@Background Pony #F906
At a glance, youtube kids shit doesn’t just seem to be elsagate-related, but I guess you could say the reverse is true?
At a glance, youtube kids shit doesn’t just seem to be elsagate-related, but I guess you could say the reverse is true?
@Background Pony #F906
I’d held off on touching that one since it’s pretty big, but yeah,
I’d held off on touching that one since it’s pretty big, but yeah,
human vulva on pony would be a more accurate tag. If it’s fine with other tag staff, I could do that right now…@djpup3
@LightningBolt
While I’m not stellar about the idea of codifying another class of compound tags to get implications, I don’t see anything wrong with adding them to
@LightningBolt
While I’m not stellar about the idea of codifying another class of compound tags to get implications, I don’t see anything wrong with adding them to
t4t. LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Dragonpone
I do. They made the tag just before posting it here instead of asking if it’s a viable idea first.
I do. They made the tag just before posting it here instead of asking if it’s a viable idea first.
Dragonpone
Moderator
Badge Dragon
@LightningBolt
Yes, they could’ve brought it up before tagging it.
It’s also a term that people use, and its use on the site as suggested would be similar in concept to tags we already have for other groups.
Yes, they could’ve brought it up before tagging it.
It’s also a term that people use, and its use on the site as suggested would be similar in concept to tags we already have for other groups.
I’d rather not exclude a tag from use on the sole basis that it was tagged beforehand if it can still have a use-case.
If you have concerns about its viability as a tag, put them forth.
If you have concerns about its viability as a tag, put them forth.
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Dragonpone
The same issue I have with the
The same issue I have with the
trans fluttershy tag, a lot of images make zero indication of what the depicted character(s) actually is. Having a trans flag pattern doesn’t mean the character is that. It should be applied to where it is explicitly clear within the image or description. Dragonpone
Moderator
Badge Dragon
@LightningBolt
That’s fair, but having gone through all the images currently under the tag: Almost all of them are either stated at source, tagged by the artist, or given trans flags that are clearly in reference to their own identities/sexualities (>>3051116) as opposed to simply being in support of the idea. Many of them directly use the term “t4t” at source.
That’s fair, but having gone through all the images currently under the tag: Almost all of them are either stated at source, tagged by the artist, or given trans flags that are clearly in reference to their own identities/sexualities (>>3051116) as opposed to simply being in support of the idea. Many of them directly use the term “t4t” at source.
As long as its being applied correctly, I’m fine with it.
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Dragonpone
Flags is exactly the point I mean about not being clear. Flags can just be generic support or decor, and have their own tags for them anyway.
Flags is exactly the point I mean about not being clear. Flags can just be generic support or decor, and have their own tags for them anyway.
Dragonpone
Moderator
Badge Dragon
@LightningBolt
Context makes it pretty clear images like >>3051116 are meant to be referring to the characters they’re next to. If Sunset has a Bi pride flag next to her face whilst grabbing Starlight and the description references characters the artist ships together, I think people get the picture.
Context makes it pretty clear images like >>3051116 are meant to be referring to the characters they’re next to. If Sunset has a Bi pride flag next to her face whilst grabbing Starlight and the description references characters the artist ships together, I think people get the picture.
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Dragonpone
I mean, yeah, it just isn’t applied consistently and I’d like it to be figured out when it should be tagged for the sake of all these tags. And filters and searching etc etc.
I mean, yeah, it just isn’t applied consistently and I’d like it to be figured out when it should be tagged for the sake of all these tags. And filters and searching etc etc.
Dragonpone
Moderator
Badge Dragon
@LightningBolt
If the ultimate reason for the implications not being added is a need to properly define when the tag should be used, it might be best to make a new thread with your proposed clarifications and changes.
If the ultimate reason for the implications not being added is a need to properly define when the tag should be used, it might be best to make a new thread with your proposed clarifications and changes.
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@Dragonpone
Well, I also want them to discuss tags before making them, but yeah I guess so.
Well, I also want them to discuss tags before making them, but yeah I guess so.
princess 
Connoisseur of Thinn
@Blissful690
Then the latter tag needs serious cleanup, because it seems to be almost entirely used as a synonym forprincess twilight 2.0.Also, the tag impliestwilight sparkleandalicornbut nottwilight sparkle (alicorn).
I did some cleanup here - I added
princess twilight 2.0 to all the older twilight sparkle (alicorn) images which didn’t have it but depicted Twilight’s Celestia-like final form.There are a bunch of
princess twilight 2.0 images which don’t have the older twilight sparkle (alicorn) tag, in addition to the implication issue you mentioned. Maybe a mod can help mass-tag these? princess
Connoisseur of Thinn
@Dragonpone
Thanks!
Thanks!
Related: there’s the
ultimate twilight tag. It predates princess twilight 2.0 (first image is >>1418 from 2012) but I don’t find the distinction useful in 2024. These look like tags that should be aliased or at least have one imply the other.The big wrinkle I see here is that
princess twilight 2.0 implies the last problem (the episode tag) while many ultimate twilight images predate that episode and thus obviously weren’t made with the intent of referencing it. What was the rationale behind setting this implication? Final-form “Tallight” has official appearances outside that episode - like in the old Gameloft MLP game and the IDW comics. Background Pony #0299
@Snowy Comet
Already discussed elsewhere:
Alias the tag “princess twilight 2.0” to “ultimate twilight”
Already discussed elsewhere:
Alias the tag “princess twilight 2.0” to “ultimate twilight”
Icicle Niceicle 1517 
Ocs,Boops,Tickles&Memes
Can the blackwashing tag be nuked?
Its being spammed by someone whose upset over artists making humanizations black
LightningBolt
Senior Moderator
Undead inside
@icicle wicicle 1517
Looks like a lot of them are color edits, which is where the concept would actually apply neutrally.
Looks like a lot of them are color edits, which is where the concept would actually apply neutrally.
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!