Colored fur tags implications

BUR #3797 has been rejected.

create implication white_fur -> fur
create implication brown_fur -> fur
create implication black_fur -> fur
create implication two-tone_fur -> fur
create implication pink_fur -> fur
create implication grey_fur -> fur
create implication blue_fur -> fur
create implication orange_fur -> fur
create implication red_fur -> fur
create implication purple_fur -> fur
create implication green_fur -> fur
create implication beige_fur -> fur
create implication spotted_fur -> fur
create implication striped_fur -> fur

Implicating colored fur tags to fur tag.

Firstly, I'd like to propose a change to the fur tag. It was supposed to be specifically for furs (clothes made of fur) rather than fur that was attached to a character for most of its existence until someone changed the wiki in late 2016 to include both. Combined with the fact that, as a tag, the word fur on its own makes most people think of the hair attached to animals before the article of clothing, this has resulted in the tag being flooded with posts that have no fur clothing in them at all.

Using fur for both of these distinctly different things is something that should be avoided. As such, I propose we change fur so that it is exclusively for fur attached to characters' bodies and create a fur_(clothing) tag for wearable furs. Fixing the fur tag will be less messy if it's done before we imply color_fur tags to it, so it would be best for us to do so before this BUR is approved.

I agree with Zapdos, though there's a few hurdles, like fur collar which is for both collars made of fur and for animal girls' neck fur and so we'll have to figure out what to do with it. If we get a fur_(clothing) we can also imply fur trim to it btw.

Agryee with renaming first (all *_fur and fur tags). Many users (as think) confused between tags fur and furry. *_fur need rename as *_furry.
"patches of fur on the body" need replaced with more correctly frase. Example: pieces of fur fabric on the body.

AngryZapdos said:

I propose we change fur so that it is exclusively for fur attached to characters' bodies and create a fur_(clothing) tag for wearable furs.

+1

There's another question needs to be settled, though: what do we do about fur no_humans posts?

We've maintained for years that animals shouldn't be tagged tail unless there's something particularly noteworthy about their tails, and this rule arguably extends to tags like animal_ears and horns and wings, even if it isn't explicitly stated in their respective wikis. Shouldn't the same be true of fur? Everything said about animal_ears and tail in topic #5415 could apply just as well to fur, and I'd like to not see this tag get diluted to uselessness by thousands of cat and dog posts. Having to trawl through all the non-anthropomorphic Pokémon tagged fur is already annoying enough.

First off, these tags need wikis. There's a rule now that tags without wikis won't (and can't) imply other tags, exactly so these questions of "what the hell are these tags even for?" get addressed up front.

Second, I'm going to say that fur color tags should only be used for furry characters. Which would mean these tags should imply furry instead of fur, and that all cases where they're used for fur clothing need to be moved to other tags. For clothing, I don't think we need to tag the fur color. For animals, you can use things like white cat instead of white fur if you really need to tag the animal color.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

evazion said:

First off, these tags need wikis. There's a rule now that tags without wikis won't (and can't) imply other tags, exactly so these questions of "what the hell are these tags even for?" get addressed up front.

Second, I'm going to say that fur color tags should only be used for furry characters. Which would mean these tags should imply furry instead of fur, and that all cases where they're used for fur clothing need to be moved to other tags. For clothing, I don't think we need to tag the fur color. For animals, you can use things like white cat instead of white fur if you really need to tag the animal color.

There's cases where characters are not furry but have colored fur of various tones, like various monster girls (hellhound comes to mind first).

TBH I think we should separate fur into a tag for actual clothes fur (such as fur hats, fur coats, fur-trimmed stuff etc) and a tag for body fur. Something like fur_(clothing) and body_fur with an alias from fur_(body) maybe? This would allow us to safely imply these tags without ending up with a mess.

So how about like this:

mass update fur -> fur_(body) or body_fur
create implication fur_trim -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_hat -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_coat -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_boots -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_scarf -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_cape -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_jacket -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_bikini -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_capelet -> fur_(clothing)
create implication fur_gloves -> fur_(clothing)

The fur tag is mostly used for body fur, a mass update to fur_(body) could be helpful as most posts will be body fur, while the original fur tag would become a disambiguation page. Of course this would need gardening for the fur_(body) tag, to remove it from posts where fur_(clothing) would be more appropriate.

I like the suggestions @mongirlfan and @nonamethanks made. Especially the body fur utility alias.

I support splitting the fur tag into fur (clothing) and fur (body), because the fur tag on its own isn't very helpful.
I feel that searching for fur clothing colors would be rather niche. That being said, fur colors could be prone to being mistagged on fur clothing in the future.

As for the <color> + <animal> proposal, I'm not sure what to think. Just imagine if we did that for every monster, e.g. red demon, green demon, blue demon. Besides, there could be other tags like blue bird that are already used up.

Well, if anyone wants to clean up the fur tag in some sensible manner then go ahead and do it. I can't clean up 8k posts myself and I'm not doing any implications to fur as long as the tag is a mess.

All I can say is that I hate the idea of tagging both fur and furry on the same character. Or body fur, or whatever you want to call it. It's redundant and it pulls us towards e621's overly excessive furry tagging.

The bulk update request #3797 (forum #175087) has been rejected by @mongirlfan.

evazion said:

Well, if anyone wants to clean up the fur tag in some sensible manner then go ahead and do it. I can't clean up 8k posts myself and I'm not doing any implications to fur as long as the tag is a mess.

All I can say is that I hate the idea of tagging both fur and furry on the same character. Or body fur, or whatever you want to call it. It's redundant and it pulls us towards e621's overly excessive furry tagging.

I agree that tagging fur feels odd. I personally never tag fur on my furred furry posts, save for the fur colors because they're the equivalent of tagging hair colors on anime characters. I don't think I'd mind tagging fur if it was a more specific tag like body fur, though.

Now then, I understand your sentiment with "overtagging", but furries can be furless, as is the case with scalies or bird characters, so it's not exactly entirely redundant.

Finally, just to make sure, is that a "yes" on the creation of the body fur tag? If so, let me know so that I can go right ahead and start gardening.