Posted under Tags
remove implication eyebrows_visible_through_hair -> eyebrows
The wiki for eyebrows says not to use that tag unless they have unusual thickness or otherwise stand out. Being visible through hair does not necessarily make them stand and and more often than not it's something you notice while carefully looking over a picture for relevant tags.
Updated
Eyebrows visible through hair are very much part of the norm and make up a good half of all posts with the eyebrows tag. In fact if load a random post there's a good chance it will have eyebrows visible through hair; this style is very commonly used, doesn't seem quite 'special.'
+1 The implication is causing serious tag dilution for no good reason. Special as in having anything to say about them beyond "they're eyebrows" is not the same thing as meaningfully taggable special.
By Provence's logic, barefoot should imply feet, fang should imply teeth, and so on. That is counterproductive. Tag implications should be used very carefully in general, IMO.
Flopsy said:
+1 The implication is causing serious tag dilution for no good reason. Special as in having anything to say about them beyond "they're eyebrows" is not the same thing as meaningfully taggable special.
By Provence's logic, barefoot should imply feet, fang should imply teeth, and so on. That is counterproductive. Tag implications should be used very carefully in general, IMO.
I agree with that entirely.
Again I should point out, this illustration gimmick is widely used and is perhaps one of the most popular, up there with big bug eyes and exotic hair colors. Drag the Random post link to your browser's bookmark bar and click it for a little while. I reckon at least one in three of the pictures you find will have eyebrows viable through hair. If we tagged all of these with eyebrows_visible_through_hair—as really they should be—then eyebrows would cease to have any utility as a tag, it would be essentially just eyebrows visible through hair with some occasional bushy or otherwise actually notable brows.
chodorov said:
The wiki for eyebrows says not to use that tag unless they have unusual thickness or otherwise stand out.
The wiki for thick_eyebrows also states: "Cases where the character has unusually thick eyebrows."
Why can't we just nuke the eyebrows tag altogether? Its existence seems to cause confusion.
chodorov said:
Being visible through hair does not necessarily make them stand and and more often than not it's something you notice while carefully looking over a picture for relevant tags.
+1
chodorov said:
Please no. I'm all for also removing the thick eyebrows implication too but I see eyebrows tag as a nice way of show casing great brows, just like nose and lips.
Why not put such posts in a dedicated "outstanding eyebrows" pool? An outstanding_eyebrows tag would suffer from subjectiveness.
Provence said:
Well, I can live with that.
But what is about the tag gardening then :3?
The wiki for eyebrows states: "Tag for when a character's eyebrows are unusually thick or otherwise stand out from the norm."
The wiki for thick_eyebrows states: "Cases where the character has unusually thick eyebrows."
It therefore follows that we have to filter out all "outstanding" eyebrows and put them in the pool mentioned above.
Tag gardening query: eyebrows -eyebrows_visible_through_hair -forked_eyebrows -thick_eyebrows
Afterwards, we can nuke the eyebrows tag and remove its implications.
reiyasona said:
Why not put such posts in a dedicated "outstanding eyebrows" pool? An outstanding_eyebrows tag would suffer from subjectiveness.
The wiki for eyebrows states: "Tag for when a character's eyebrows are unusually thick or otherwise stand out from the norm."
The wiki for thick_eyebrows states: "Cases where the character has unusually thick eyebrows."It therefore follows that we have to filter out all "outstanding" eyebrows and put them in the pool mentioned above.
Tag gardening query: eyebrows -eyebrows_visible_through_hair -forked_eyebrows -thick_eyebrows
Afterwards, we can nuke the eyebrows tag and remove its implications.
Would you in turn say that nose and other such facial tags be nuked too? I guess I should clarify that I like the eyebrows tag as a source of outstanding brows but that's not the way I think it should be tagged. I think it should apply to distinct, accurate, and sufficiently drawn brows. A little colored arch wouldn't suffice. Also isn't this at a scale too large for a pool?
Similarly a girl on this site usually has a little spec for her nose but you shouldn't use the nose tag unless there is a sufficiently drawn nose.
I think regardless of how the tag is handled going forward, the thick, furrowed, and visible through hair implications have got to go. Start with this?
Well, in all honesty: I have looked through some poats with this tag. And sometimes the eyebrows are really not visible. Mostly in zeparoh's posts. Because he is one of the few users who actually use this tag. And the eyebrows per se aren't really..prominent in these picture. So go ahead. I don't object here anymore.
chodorov said:
Would you in turn say that nose and other such facial tags be nuked too? I guess I should clarify that I like the eyebrows tag as a source of outstanding brows but that's not the way I think it should be tagged. I think it should apply to distinct, accurate, and sufficiently drawn brows. A little colored arch wouldn't suffice. Also isn't this at a scale too large for a pool?
Similarly a girl on this site usually has a little spec for her nose but you shouldn't use the nose tag unless there is a sufficiently drawn nose.
I actually like the logic behind your proposal. Put in more general terms: A facial feature tag shall only be used if the level of detail surpasses that of an ordinary anime-style drawing.
A post like this should therefore be tagged with nose, lips, eyebrows and eyelashes. In contrast, this post should not include any of these tags.
chodorov said:
I think regardless of how the tag is handled going forward, the thick, furrowed, and visible through hair implications have got to go. Start with this?
+1
+1
eyebrows_visible_through_hair has 1087 pages, eyebrows -eyebrows_visible_through_hair has 543 pages... and I found 5 on just the first page to which I added eyebrows_visible_through_hair. It's so common stylistically, the implication isn't helpful. And searching eyebrows -eyebrows_visible_through_hair means I'll miss anything with notable eyebrows that happen to be visible through hair, like post #2527302.
Edit: I had stuff about maromayu (Pixivpedia) here, but I just noticed the short_eyebrows tag which pretty much handles it. It could use some more exposure, though, looking at -short_eyebrows anila_(granblue_fantasy) and -short_eyebrows kamiki_izumo.
Also, is there anyone besides elfriede_bernstein who has lightning bolt/zigzag eyebrows, that might warrant a tag? They don't fit the current wiki definition of forked eyebrows ("Eyebrows that are split at the outer ends").
Updated
Well, there's Kousaka Shigure, and possibly some others from that series. Unusual eyebrows were its hallmark.
Just wondering if we could get an approval or disapproval for this issue. Maybe summoning red names will work (ohoho) @NWF_Renim @Hillside_Moose @Type-kun
The bulk update request #829 has been approved.
Went ahead and approved the removal of the implications, but as for changing the usage of the eyebrows tag, it's probably doomed to failure. As long as it's the generically named "eyebrows", it'll be eternally tagged generically by users. In short it'd require endless maintenance.
fuzzygnome said:
Well, there's Kousaka Shigure, and possibly some others from that series. Unusual eyebrows were its hallmark.
Can probably go ahead and create an unusual_eyebrows or similarly named tag to cover such eyebrows.
