Being that catgirl is aliased into the cat_ears tag, the male equivalent should get the same treatment or at the very least the catboy tag moved into cat_ears.
To be honest I'd be against making this alias, but that is because these aliases really should be removed and the animal-people tags restored.
For most of the animal parts it is the whole package and/or meta knowledge of the character that identifies what animal the part belongs to. This means that the removed animal-people tags would be more logical to be used in most cases as opposed to the specialized animal parts tags, since you're identifying what type of animal person they are first before you go about assigning then what animal the individual parts belong to. In many, if not most, cases the parts alone lack enough information be themselves to properly identify what animal it belongs to, as a lot of animal ears are actually identically shaped and overlap in color and patten.
We already left cow_girl separate so I guess we can undo these if people are careful with them. I undid catgirl and doggirl since thoe were the ones that came to mind.
I disagree with the deletion of the catgirl tag, at the very least. It's a rather common search term, and deleting it can make things rather confusing and makes it harder to search for the intended tag. Plus there are a number of similar tags that put up the same search: cat_girl and nekomimi (which tends to be used to refer to female cat-people rather then the literal translation of "cat ears"). If you delete all the gender-related tags, a bunch of casual users are suddenly going to be unable to find what they're looking for.
Cat_ears-related tags encompass a massive pool of images and deleting aliased tags haphazardly throws a wrench into it when looking for its search term.
Additionally, I disagree with aliasing catboy into cat_ears. Male-equivalents are much harder to search for, so their tags should be left alone.
(if I'm mixing up alias and implicate wrong, sorry, I'm a pretty casual user myself)
I did read the thread, I just don't know the difference between "alias" and "implicate"
Turning cat_ears tags into something like cat_person_ears or the like is needlessly complicated and isn't going to be a regular search term. Moving catboy into cat_ears will make it needlessly hard to trudge through 20000 images of cat-people (99% of which will be female) to find a male one without adding a bunch of other tags to the search. Removing catgirl as an alias to cat_ears brings a lot of searches to a 404 page because a common term has suddenly gone missing.
Tags should be easy to search for. Political correctness or gender neutrality shouldn't be put before ease of searching.
Yes, except you're arguing that an alias that was already done away with should be done away with. Should we realias it and delete it again just to show that alias who's boss?
EDIT: As well as pointless, considering there are still two similar tags aliased to cat_ears. Considering how often cat_girl is typed without a space, it would be beneficial to bring it back.
I'm not sure what your issue is Dejiko42, you seem to be arguing against the alias and against the unaliasing of tags.
The catgirl tag has not been populated, which is why it does not bring up anything, just like all the other animal_girl tags now. This means that they can be used, as opposed to being forced to always be converted over to specific animal_ear tags.
Just because some of the tags haven't been unaliased yet, doesn't mean it is pointless. It just means that there are some tags left to be unaliased and we that should have aliased over these alternative names to a unified naming scheme. Given that we use cow_girl, it would probably be best go the route of using names following a <animal>_gender route. So instead of using catgirl, we'd use cat_girl. We can always unalias cat_girl from cat_ears.
Just to note I did not propose turning tags into cat_person_ears tags. What I was saying is that some of these animals ears tags should be done with a <animal>_<person/gender> +animal_ears searches instead (for example a bear_girl animal_ears instead of using something like bear_ears). If you checked you'll note I said "searches" not tags.
As for my justification on why I'd propose swapping over in some cases to using a <animal>_gender +animal_ears search instead, it's because there is a lot of overlap and redundancy to some of these parts tags (especially the ear tags). As an example of that, there isn't necessarily a whole lot of difference between non-floppy dog_ears (post #38563), wolf_ears (post #117200), cat_ears (post #1390928), and solid color fox_ears (post #1187115) in plenty of cases.
remove alias cat_girl -> cat_ears create alias catgirl -> cat_girl create alias doggirl -> dog_girl remove alias foxgirl -> fox_ears create alias foxgirl -> fox_girl
And perhaps define them similarly to cow girl, something like this:
cat_girl
This tag should be used for girls with at least two of the following traits:
As for my justification on why I'd propose swapping over in some cases to using a <animal>_gender +animal_ears search instead, it's because there is a lot of overlap and redundancy to some of these parts tags (especially the ear tags). As an example of that, there isn't necessarily a whole lot of difference between non-floppy dog_ears (post #38563), wolf_ears (post #117200), cat_ears (post #1390928), and solid color fox_ears (post #1187115) in plenty of cases.
I agree. Most cases where I tag a specific type of <animal>_ears, I have to look at the tail, behavior of the character, etc, to know the specific type, because the ears are generic as you said.
Toks said: This tag should be used for girls with at least two of the following traits:
You really only need one feature unless you're dealing with chimeras/fusions.
You still run into problems. If you cannot identify the animal, you'll fall back on animal_ears and tail anyway. there's just as much redundancy/overlay between dog_girl and wolf_girl as there is between dog_ears and wolf_ears. (often based on canon/because the artist said so) If you cannot identify the gender/the person has no gender/has both genders.
