Question about #girls and #boys tag

Should the images contain only a specific gender without the other gender present?

Someone tagged this image like this (2) post #519743 / post #487997 (3) post #412205 post #450717 (4) post #490399
I didn't know if I should erase the tags. There are a few more like that scattered between the #girls and #boys, when there is indeed the opposite gender in the pic.

I removed the tags from these, but will keep as an example.
post #473817 / post #459524

I don't particularly see what's wrong with it

unicogirl said:
Should the images contain only a specific gender without the other gender present?

Someone tagged this image like this (2) post #519743 / post #487997 (3) post #473817 / post #459524
I didn't know if I should erase the tags. There are a few more like that scattered between the #girls and #boys, when there is indeed the opposite gender in the pic.

Definition of 2girls:

"Use this tag for images that depict exactly two female characters." [Emphasis added]

Apparently, these people struggle with the meaning of the term exactly.

In the examples you've provided, I would delete both the #girls and #boys tags.

I disagree with your definition, Moose. Exactly only emphasizes that of the number of females present there should only be that given number. That number indicates nothing of the number of non-females present in the image.

Godel said:
I don't particularly see what's wrong with it

Nor do I, I say go for it.

oyi
Well, I erased the tags from the previous (3) post - hours ago. I will put new ones up, and some are still there. But it still made me think about how the #girls and #boys should be done.

Although the wiki states "exactly", it does not state "only". As NWF Renim put.

I don't see anything wrong with the double tag either, but the overwhelming number of pics that have the one gender, with no opposites seen, is making me think that the tags should only count when it contains the one gender.

NWF_Renim said:
I disagree with your definition, Moose. Exactly only emphasizes that of the number of females present there should only be that given number. That number indicates nothing of the number of non-females present in the image.

::shrug:: I tend to carry a strict interpretation of things, so when I read "exactly two female characters," I expect "exactly two female characters," not "exactly two female characters and n number of boys."

It's bad enough that the 2girls tag devolved into a counting tag, adding "#boys" would dilute the tags even further.

2girls -*boys

I disagree with you on it "devolving," the first concept used for 2girls should never have had the limitations of a # in it.

Anyways, perhaps there needs to be tag for images depicting characters of both genders? Most of the images depict only one gender (and like 90% of those are female only), and the only real tag for finding a mixed gender group is couple, which for the most part limits the image to 2 characters. We have a male tag, but -male won't remove depictions of mixed groups due to it's definition and use.

Agreed that mixed # tags are OK, and that something oughta be done regarding non-male images. female? no_males? Also, since the cutoff for # tags is 5, would many_girls and many_boys tags be good?

T5J8F8 said:
and that something oughta be done regarding non-male images. female? no_males?

Well, this is like 90% of the site though.

The female tag has also been mentioned before in forum #19959 and was considered fairly useless.

The tag could be foregone in cases of solo and yuri, perhaps? But then, that'd be uneven, and there might could be yuri with male characters present, in whatever facility, right? Erm... *hangs back*

In any case... the wiki should probably be changed to make this completely clear, either way. Right now I think "exactly two female characters" implies no more than two females, without regard for the number of males...

But it's obvious people have read it differently, so one way or the other, it should be made clear. That's what the wiki is for, for preventing this sort of confusion.

So are traps/futas/androgynous/sexually indeterminate characters considered male or female for the purposes of these tags?

evazion said:
So are traps/futas/androgynous/sexually indeterminate characters considered male or female for the purposes of these tags?

I say leave that to crossdressing, or just leave the tag out and let the pic be as it is.

=

Anyway, do the admins say how certain Tags should be?
So far the #girls and #boys have been doing fine without the double mention. It pretty much becomes a group (everyone) if both genders are present, but that tag is more for series based pics that have a cast of characters.

T5J8F8 said: and that something oughta be done regarding non-male images. female? no_males?

Oh god no, absolutely not.

unicogirl said: Anyway, do the admins say how certain Tags should be?

I could pretend I have a strong opinion, but I don't really, because I don't even like the #girls/boys tags to begin with, as most people know by now.

If I had to choose, I'd say that e.g. 2girls should depict an image with just two girls in it. No guys. Ditto on the reverse. That's how it's been used anyway.

To updated.
I changed the wiki to "No females present."
I was gonna do the same for the #girls tag. Since the #girls have an overwhelming number of pics of just females with no males.

If anyone disagrees with the wiki, I can edit it again.

The male tag seems to handle if there are males present in a pic with females. I saw the history for it, and how it evolved.

I don't see a point in limiting it to only males. We have a male tag for that reason. If you want to limit it then just combine the two tags in a #boys male search.

alright
edit it back, but I would like more answers for some kind of final. Unless this will just end up an open type of tag?