Commonly misused tags

I think the problem with all the demon tags is that depictions of demons tend to be very varied depending on culture, genre, and personal taste. A demon can be a big red humanoid with horns, a winged humanoid with a goat's head, horrific abominations, weird animals, cute girls, randomly generated monstrosities represented by '&', etc. It's a pretty vague tag as a result.

More so for the demon_girl and demon_boy tag. The criteria most people are using are probably leathery wings and horns, which can also apply to tags like dragon_girl. It's even more troublesome when it's not a full body view; is that supposed to be demon_horns or goat_horns or just plain old nondescript horns? Is that a black dragon_wings or demon_wings or bat_wings? Also, is there a border between, say, being a demon_boy and plain old demon?

Also demon_wings and bat_wings tend to take artistic liberties so it's hard to tell when one is supposed to be the other since they're both visible as leathery wings. Same with dragon_wings. Just look at some remilia_scarlet and koakuma and say which wing is supposed to be which.

Just my two cents on the thing.

Can we nuke this tag by chance?

Chiera said:

Can we nuke this tag by chance?

Nuke the demon tag? No, we still have posts like post #2763670 and post #2884613 where it is unquestionably whats being depicted. I could volunteer to purge it from horned and winged humans. (Not volunteering to clean up the demon girl tag. Thats an order of magnitude bigger.)

tapnek said:

Unless it's a disembodied penis.

personally, I also add solo_focus for that.

Convenient censoring.
It is not convenient censoring when you cant see someone's nipples because of a breast grab (post #303876).
It is not convenient censoring when the images border is censoring (post #2880620).
It is not convenient censoring when someone is intentionally covering (post #2257362).
It is not convenient censoring when a girls clothes are covering her (post #1397687).
An of course any one taking a bubble bath gets convenient censoring from soap censor (post #1990736).

^To clarify - clothing can be convenient censoring, although yes - not in that way.
An example of clothing as convenient censoring would be something like post #2827790

Can we throw copyright tags into this? Fate/Grand Order has needed gardening for a while now.

For the tags portrait and profile, are these supposed to be used when there is only one character in an image and/or comic panel? The tags' wiki pages don't really specify that.

Also, the wiki page for profile is a bit unclear on something. It says "When one side of the character's face is shown.", but does that refer to only the face, like a from side portrait image or is it just for whenever one side of a character's face is shown?

willsolvit said:

Can we throw copyright tags into this? Fate/Grand Order has needed gardening for a while now.

@willsolvit
I have an idea about this tag: How about we still put "FGO" and "Fate/Grand_Order" as a translated tag?
But not under the fate/grand_order wiki, but under the character's wikis? So that way we can still get the right copyright, because the characters have the fate/grand_order tag under "Other names" on their wikis.
Would that work?

Chiera said:

@willsolvit
I have an idea about this tag: How about we still put "FGO" and "Fate/Grand_Order" as a translated tag?
But not under the fate/grand_order wiki, but under the character's wikis? So that way we can still get the right copyright, because the characters have the fate/grand_order tag under "Other names" on their wikis.
Would that work?

That would help but the main problem is characters that originage outside FGO but appear in it and you wouldn't be able to do this with them

pocky day: This is supposed to be for posts actually referencing Pocky Day. Most posts don't.

evazion said:

pocky day: This is supposed to be for posts actually referencing Pocky Day. Most posts don't.

Doesn't help that artists tag those pics as such on twitter/pixiv.

What if it references pocky day in the artist commentary?

Midriff
This tag is very misuded right now.
One shouldn't use it on bikini, nude or similar picture.

BrokenEagle98 said:

What if it references pocky day in the artist commentary?

Tag what you see not what you read. Right?

ion288 said:

Tag what you see not what you read. Right?

Yeah, but certain tags requires some knowledge, too.
It usually is tag what you see, but when the artist clearl references something and we can look it up, then it should be tagged as such in my opinion.

The point of tag what you see is that you should be able to tag things correctly just by looking at them. Is post #2755688 correct? Who knows, there's no commentary and the post is bad id. There's no visual difference between it and any other pocky post.

Currently the Pocky Day tag amounts to "Pocky posts that happened to be uploaded on Nov. 11th". I don't think that's very useful given that there's little difference between these posts and pocky posts uploaded on any other day of the year.

evazion said:

The point of tag what you see is that you should be able to tag things correctly just by looking at them. Is post #2755688 correct? Who knows, there's no commentary and the post is bad id. There's no visual difference between it and any other pocky post.

You have to be able to track it back.
Also posts that are uploaded on that date on Pixiv are highly likely referencing the pocky day.

light smile: this tag intentionally doesn't implicate smile, meaning they should probably be kept mutually exclusive.

evazion said:

light smile: this tag intentionally doesn't implicate smile, meaning they should probably be kept mutually exclusive.

There are borderline cases where it doesn't feel wrong to have both tags (since it's somewhat subjective as it is), though they probably do overlap more than they should.