Tag Implications

@sammy0205  
Like I said, a canon race swap is still a race swap. By your logic, “equestria girls” images shouldn’t get the “humanized” tag and “breezified” images shouldn’t get the “species swap” tag.

@Background Pony #DED3  
You’ve already denied you think it should be so earlier in your strawmanning, but if for example Fluttershy reverted to Flutterbat and stayed that way through the season finale with no indication they’d ever change her back, yes, Flutterbat would be enough, it would no longer have to imply species swap.
 
I can only pray a mod steps in soon and weighs in explicitly on this (they’ve already weighed in implicitly with the whole ‘princess twilight is enough we don’t need to tag it as alicorn and soforth anymore’ thing) we’ve derailed the thread long enough with this nonsense.

@Background Pony #DED3  

 
Typically they don’t. There are far more equestria girls, -humanized than equestria girls, humanized pics, and likewise far more equestria girls-ified, -humanized than equestria girls-ified, humanized.

artist:keshapanther -> artist:uglytree
 
The source for image 502406 is http://keshapanther.deviantart.com/art/DERP-416737514 which redirects you to http://uglytree.deviantart.com/art/DERP-416737514
 
Edit: Yeah, woops, sorry about posting in the wrong thread!

@Background Pony #7AEC  
If you’re really going to go on and on about this I suggest you take this discussion to the Tag Discussion thread instead. Also I won’t be surprised if most of the “humanized” ones are human ponidox, or people abusing tags to filter that one pic they don’t like again.
 
@sirvancelot  
That’s an alias, not an implication. Also don’t go by source alone, type keshapanther.deviantart.com in your browser and see if that redirects. This is why: http://garbagename.deviantart.com/art/DERP-416737514

@barbeque  
I’m not going on about it. That’s #DED3.

@Background Pony #7AEC  
Whoops, my bad. But yeah, #DED3 stop derailing this thread.

@Keith Mowz  
I never said that it shouldn’t be so; I said that it should be so, but your logic would say it shouldn’t. In fact, by your logic, every single image of Twilight as a non-alicorn should be tagged as a race swap.
 
This is a thread specifically for tag implications. We are talking about a tag implication. That’s hardly “derailed”.
 
 
@Background Pony #7AEC  
That’s an oversight, not a tagging policy. If we were going by the reasoning that’s being spouted here, those images don’t count as humanizations because they’re canon, so the tag should be removed.

sgt frog -> keroro -> keroro gunso

@Background Pony #DED3  
Look, I don’t totally disagree with you about Twilight, but you could do a little more work on making people want to agree with you. You’re coming off as kind of absolutist and negative, and that doesn’t really win friends. Anyway, I’d agree that Twilight’s race was swapped, but the thing is, if people do a search on the race swap tag are they really going to be hoping to see generic pictures of Twilight Sparkle? Especially if they’re just season 4 screencaps? I don’t think so, though you’re certainly welcome to disagree. I’d more want to see Twilight as an earth pony, or a pegasus, and think “hmmm how did this happen and what would the ramifications be?”
 
As for EQG, well, they’re not really the same characters, are they? I don’t think I’d want to say that EQG Rainbow Dash, the girl who was born a human and grew up a human and plays soccer and guitar, should be tagged as humanized or equestria girls-ified. If pony Rainbow Dash, who wants to join the Wonderbolts and handles Ponyville’s weather, were to pass through the magic portal and start attending Canterlot High for some reason, that’d be different, but in most pictures that’s not the case. So I think the (majority of cases of) tagging is correct.
 
Should equestria girls-ified imply humanized? Eh probably not. They’ve got pastel skin colors, they can sprout ears and wings under somewhat unclear circumstances, their culture has an inexplicable fascination with horses. Their fashion sense is rather different than ours. They’re somewhere between human and anthro, and there’s a difference in intention between converting a normally-pony character to human vs. EQG. Heck, if you wanted to take one of the EQG background characters and give them some human flesh colors and more realistic proportions and maybe fewer miniskirts, that might even be a case of equestria girls, humanized. But people might disagree there.
 
Anyway. I’m sorry, this post was much longer than I meant it to be. I think what people are saying about “derailing” is that this thread is mostly a submission box for implication suggestions, and the fact that other people can see them and discuss them is partially–not entirely–a side effect. Certainly if someone suggests that hugging should imply shipping, you’re welcome to say hey no that doesn’t sound right, I hug my friends all the time. But if something’s particularly contentious, it just makes sense to take it to the tag discussion thread, because people who want to discuss tags are going to be hanging out there. And if you can talk to them and maybe convince them or just generally come to a consensus, that’ll probably give you better chances in this thread.

so uh, should morbidly obese, as in REALY FUCKING FAT, imply all the ones below it in the scale of chubyness?  
as in fat, chubby, plump, bbw(?) and obese?
 
i ve’seen pics that have 2 or more of these tags, not sure if i should delete the lesser ones or leve them be.
 

 
also, should imposible large everything imply imposible large breast, crothcboobs, belly, ass penis, balls, horn, wide hips, horsecock, hoofs…
 
you get the idea….

@paluzna  
The morbidly obese, obese, fat, chubby, plump, etc. tags refer to levels of body weight. People’s ideas of the differences between those tags will vary but chubby and plump are certainly not equivalent to being immobile with fat.

@kleptomage  
ok, got it, if i see a morbidly obese pic i delete the others.

@kleptomage  
This has come up before. My thoughts on the matter were
 
morbidly obese -> obese -> fat
 
due to the distinct set-subset relationship.
 
The tags “chubby” and “plump”, however, are not supersets of the previous three, so should not be implied by them. If anything, if they’re part of the same hierarchy, they’d be on the same level as “fat”, assuming they’re not synonyms for each other. I’m not too sure about the definitions of those two, to be honest.
 

@Roxor  
@paluzna  
@kleptomage
 
Problem is, I’ve seen people put the ‘morbidly obese’ tag on a lot of images, simply because the characters in the images weren’t a ‘healthy’ weight. This is another set of tags where people often put too much personal preference into how they tag images. There needs to be clearly defined rule and guidelines for which tag should apply to an image, else there’s going to be more tag wars over it.
 
Firstly, there needs to be a main tag that all such images fall under. Something like ‘overweight’, or if you want to break it down a bit further, you can use ‘BBW’ for female images, and ‘BBM’ for male images, like a lot of other sites do.
 
Secondly, ‘chubby’ should have ‘plump’ rolled into it, since both of these mean roughly the same thing, and should include images where the character is overweight, but not excessively so, such as these examples.  
 

 
‘Morbidly obese’ should only apply to images where the character is excessively overweight. For example, the character is immobile because of their weight, their belly is past their knees, etc. It should be clear, and not debatable that the character is morbidly obese, otherwise it ends up coming down to personal preference and that’s how tag wars start. For example, these images are clearly ‘morbidly obese’.  
 
 

 
Everything else should fall under the tag ‘fat’. If they’re not big enough to be ‘morbidly obese’ and too big to be considered simply ‘chubby’, then the ‘fat’ tag should be enough for them. For example, these images I would consider simply ‘fat’  
 
 

 
 
Also, the ‘pregnant’ and ‘inflation’ tags shouldn’t be included, just to keep things clear. While, yes, the character in the image can be overweight as well as pregnant/inflated, neither one requires the other.

@TheDeinonychus  
Dude, this is a safe thread.  
Spoiler those images and put a warning.

@TheDeinonychus  
what this cool horse said.
 
@BigMax  
uh… the embeds spoilering is working fine for me
 
i have morbidly obese hiden and those pics taged as such are spoilered for me.

@paluzna  
Oh, right, nevermind. I forgot that embedded pictures obey to filters.

@TheDeinonychus  
So, alias chubby with plump and fat with obese and have a master tag implied by all the tags in an overweight spectrum that goes chubby -> fat -> morbidly obese? I agree.

@kleptomage
 
Pretty much. It also need to be fairly clear what counts as what. Like I said before, some people may consider images that are only slightly overweight as ‘morbidly obese’, simply because of personal opinion. Anything that’s extremely overweight should go in ‘morbidly obese’. Anything just slightly or moderately overweight should go under ‘chubby’, and everything else should fall under ‘fat’. Simple, easily defined, and hopefully shouldn’t leave much room for tag-wars.  
And the whole thing should fall under an ‘Overweight’ tag, for ease of filtering.

@BigMax
 
Yeah, but a lot of tags (including this one) usually imply some sort of fetish content. Finding decent example pictures quickly that show the tags clearly and which are SFW can be a bit of a chore.
 
But that’s what spoiler images are for.

bat pony alicorn -> bat pony
 
trotting in place -> trotting

deeply intrigued cadence -> exploitable meme

@kleptomage  

 
You’re not quite getting what I was saying about a set-subset relationship.
 
morbidly obese -> obese -> fat
 
It’s not markers on a spectrum. Being obese is a special case of being fat, and being morbidly obese is a special case of being obese. Being morbidly obese implies being obese, and being obese implies being fat.
 
It’s like directories on your computer. The full path would be something like “c:\images\weight\fat\obese\morbidly obese”. Each level you go down is getting more specific.
 
I was just talking about adding links between tags to match the sub-categories present in the definitions of the terms.
 
@TheDeinonychus  

 
So for a directory-style example, you’re suggesting this?
 
overweight  
overweight\plump  
overweight\fat  
overweight\fat\obese  
overweight\fat\obese\morbidly obese

I noticed a fairly amount of edited screencaps from Equestria Girls and such (mostly in underwear and in the nude), and I wonder since they are so different from the original screencap, should they be even tagged as screecap anymore?  
Because edited screencap implies screencap, but here is the difference so big that the original screencap is only the source material of a new picture.  
Some examples:  
 
 
 
 
 
 
It is clear that the difference is pretty big. And the last one isn’t even a screecap from the short anymore, but an original picture, which is inspired by the one from short, but still has the edited screencap -> screencap tagging.