When submitting or modifying the tags to an image, please read the tagging guide! I've already had a few users note to me that a few tags are violating the guidelines. Let's make this clear.
Sanguine Date:Jul 11, 2013 12:52 AMTitle:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
When submitting or modifying the tags to an image, please read the tagging guide! I've already had a few users note to me that a few tags are violating the guidelines. Let's make this clear.
BioPhoenix Date:Jul 11, 2013 4:36 AMTitle:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Some more borderline cases.
Loli and shota, or young, or something of the sort. As body types for human or anthropomorphic characters, should they be tagged? (I mostly only ask because "cub" for young-looking Pokémon is apparently out.)
Clothing and accessories which, while perfectly normal, can also have fetish-linked sexual appeal, such as swimsuits, maid/nurse uniforms and thigh-high stockings. Should they be tagged?
Until these (and probably others) are clarified, I will assume the answers are yes, because I have personally searched for some subset of these requested tags on other Danbooru-type galleries, and I figure it is easier to remove tags that have been added in error than it is to add tags that have been omitted in error.
Flygon Date:Jul 11, 2013 5:23 AMTitle:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
How about the cum_inside tag? Since it's technically a sex act.
Oh! And how about the kissing tag? That one happens a lot.
I'll double check with the other staff regarding those, they're both very borderline cases.
Some more borderline cases.
Loli and shota, or young, or something of the sort. As body types for human or anthropomorphic characters, should they be tagged? (I mostly only ask because "cub" for young-looking Pokémon is apparently out.)
Clothing and accessories which, while perfectly normal, can also have fetish-linked sexual appeal, such as swimsuits, maid/nurse uniforms and thigh-high stockings. Should they be tagged?
Loli, shota, and young are in the same basket as cub. Anthropomorphic are explicitly allowed to be tagged, yes.
I'll check with the clothing issue, seems to be another borderline case.
I'm sorry I can't be more definite. But, given the gallery is freshly opened, some rough patches are to be expected. ;)
BioPhoenix Date:Jul 11, 2013 5:56 AMTitle:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Maybe I should clarify.
When I refer to "loli or shota, or young, or something of the sort", I refer not to matters of age itself, or anything that could possibly relate to ferals, but a possible body sub-shape of anthro, human, and near-human characters. (It could theoretically apply to taurs and other monster-girls as well, but I haven't seen any Pokémon ones it would apply to yet.)
Looking at gallery.agn.ph/post/show/29376, the female character has what I would call a "loli" body type. Likewise, on Danbooru and Gelbooru, most sexual images of (for example) Remilia Scarlet are tagged "loli", despite Remilia being a 500-year-old vampire devil, because her body resembles that of a young girl. (Gelbooru also uses "loli" to refer exclusively to images with sexual content, though this isn't a problem for AGNPH.)
cge0361 Date:Jul 11, 2013 1:20 PMTitle:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Arguing about individual tags is unproductive. You need a system.
First, sorting by characteristic. Not for searching so much as knowing what the image is without seeing it, this is the bare-bones tagging every image would require. • Category (choose one): M, F, M/M, M/F, F/F, Alt, ?. • Anthropomorphic level (choose one): Realistic, Canon, Pokemorph, Gijinka. • Artist identity.
Second is unique to this site, the species of Pokemon involved. To keep the number of tags down (750 next gen?) and recognizing that generally only final forms are portrayed, those species should probably be used for most lines. Exception would made for families that fork; ralts and kirlia under kirlia, gardevoir and gallade each get a tag. All eeveelutions (and eevee itself) would have to be tagged uniquely because it's an evolutionary daisy wheel, but fortunately it's the only one and people are pickly about their eeveekin and would gripe if they had to sift through a single catch-all. Also noteworthy would be trainer as a tag that specifically does not imply real humans but human-like fictional characters that appear alongside pokemon and sometimes form close interpersonal relationships with them. Cough.
Third is tagging for content. Mostly an aid to searching, this is where your tag arguments are coming from. How about making it a rule for verbs only, and to ensure the terms are consistent, they have to be mod approved specifically to remove redundancy and avoid poor application. So, "kissing" or "insemination" would be valid, "green eyes" is rejected as not a verb, "cum_inside" is redundant and how an underaged person would describe something he hasn't learned the correct word for. Cough. This would rule out clothing-based fetish tagging as suggested above, and that's probably a good thing.
BioPhoenix Date:Jul 11, 2013 5:40 PMTitle:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Arguing about individual tags is unproductive. You need a system.
First, sorting by characteristic. Not for searching so much as knowing what the image is without seeing it, this is the bare-bones tagging every image would require. • Category (choose one): M, F, M/M, M/F, F/F, Alt, ?. • Anthropomorphic level (choose one): Realistic, Canon, Pokemorph, Gijinka. • Artist identity.
Second is unique to this site, the species of Pokemon involved. To keep the number of tags down (750 next gen?) and recognizing that generally only final forms are portrayed, those species should probably be used for most lines. Exception would made for families that fork; ralts and kirlia under kirlia, gardevoir and gallade each get a tag. All eeveelutions (and eevee itself) would have to be tagged uniquely because it's an evolutionary daisy wheel, but fortunately it's the only one and people are pickly about their eeveekin and would gripe if they had to sift through a single catch-all. Also noteworthy would be trainer as a tag that specifically does not imply real humans but human-like fictional characters that appear alongside pokemon and sometimes form close interpersonal relationships with them. Cough.
Third is tagging for content. Mostly an aid to searching, this is where your tag arguments are coming from. How about making it a rule for verbs only, and to ensure the terms are consistent, they have to be mod approved specifically to remove redundancy and avoid poor application. So, "kissing" or "insemination" would be valid, "green eyes" is rejected as not a verb, "cum_inside" is redundant and how an underaged person would describe something he hasn't learned the correct word for. Cough. This would rule out clothing-based fetish tagging as suggested above, and that's probably a good thing.
I agree that we need a system, but your suggested system is incompatible with the tagging guide as is, and it's wrong in some other ways as well. I don't have time to formulate a complete argument because I have to leave momentarily, but I will start now.
Tagging only by final form species is blatantly incomplete and inaccurate, particularly, but not exclusively, for Pokémon whose form changes radically between evolutions, such as Magikarp and Gyarados, or Dragonair and Dragonite. Even for ones which don't, it is still conceivable that someone would want to search exclusively for the lesser-evolved one or vice versa. (E.g., "dratini -dragonair".)
Tagging for verbs only ignores things like sex toys, which are most definitely content. Also, "cum_inside" seems to be Danbooru and Gelbooru's term for the state where there is semen in lower orifices. I don't know why.
Date:Jul 10, 2013 5:33 AM(Edited:Jul 10, 2013 5:39 AM) Title:Note about Gallery Tags
This isn't how you tag an image.
This is how you tag an image.
I hope this is clear now.
As a side note, yes, the tags "gay", "lesbian", and "straight" are alright.
Date:Jul 11, 2013 12:03 AM(Edited:Jul 11, 2013 12:21 AM) Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Oh! And how about the kissing tag? That one happens a lot.
Go read my stories!!
My stories
Date:Jul 11, 2013 12:20 AM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Go read my stories!!
My stories
Date:Jul 11, 2013 12:52 AM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
What's wrong with more descript tagging?
Date:Jul 11, 2013 4:36 AM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Loli and shota, or young, or something of the sort. As body types for human or anthropomorphic characters, should they be tagged? (I mostly only ask because "cub" for young-looking Pokémon is apparently out.)
Clothing and accessories which, while perfectly normal, can also have fetish-linked sexual appeal, such as swimsuits, maid/nurse uniforms and thigh-high stockings. Should they be tagged?
Until these (and probably others) are clarified, I will assume the answers are yes, because I have personally searched for some subset of these requested tags on other Danbooru-type galleries, and I figure it is easier to remove tags that have been added in error than it is to add tags that have been omitted in error.
Date:Jul 11, 2013 5:23 AM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
I'll double check with the other staff regarding those, they're both very borderline cases.
Loli, shota, and young are in the same basket as cub. Anthropomorphic are explicitly allowed to be tagged, yes.
I'll check with the clothing issue, seems to be another borderline case.
I'm sorry I can't be more definite. But, given the gallery is freshly opened, some rough patches are to be expected. ;)
Date:Jul 11, 2013 5:56 AM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
When I refer to "loli or shota, or young, or something of the sort", I refer not to matters of age itself, or anything that could possibly relate to ferals, but a possible body sub-shape of anthro, human, and near-human characters. (It could theoretically apply to taurs and other monster-girls as well, but I haven't seen any Pokémon ones it would apply to yet.)
Looking at gallery.agn.ph/post/show/29376, the female character has what I would call a "loli" body type. Likewise, on Danbooru and Gelbooru, most sexual images of (for example) Remilia Scarlet are tagged "loli", despite Remilia being a 500-year-old vampire devil, because her body resembles that of a young girl. (Gelbooru also uses "loli" to refer exclusively to images with sexual content, though this isn't a problem for AGNPH.)
Date:Jul 11, 2013 7:58 AM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
Go read my stories!!
My stories
Date:Jul 11, 2013 1:20 PM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
First, sorting by characteristic. Not for searching so much as knowing what the image is without seeing it, this is the bare-bones tagging every image would require.
• Category (choose one): M, F, M/M, M/F, F/F, Alt, ?.
• Anthropomorphic level (choose one): Realistic, Canon, Pokemorph, Gijinka.
• Artist identity.
Second is unique to this site, the species of Pokemon involved. To keep the number of tags down (750 next gen?) and recognizing that generally only final forms are portrayed, those species should probably be used for most lines. Exception would made for families that fork; ralts and kirlia under kirlia, gardevoir and gallade each get a tag. All eeveelutions (and eevee itself) would have to be tagged uniquely because it's an evolutionary daisy wheel, but fortunately it's the only one and people are pickly about their eeveekin and would gripe if they had to sift through a single catch-all. Also noteworthy would be trainer as a tag that specifically does not imply real humans but human-like fictional characters that appear alongside pokemon and sometimes form close interpersonal relationships with them. Cough.
Third is tagging for content. Mostly an aid to searching, this is where your tag arguments are coming from. How about making it a rule for verbs only, and to ensure the terms are consistent, they have to be mod approved specifically to remove redundancy and avoid poor application. So, "kissing" or "insemination" would be valid, "green eyes" is rejected as not a verb, "cum_inside" is redundant and how an underaged person would describe something he hasn't learned the correct word for. Cough. This would rule out clothing-based fetish tagging as suggested above, and that's probably a good thing.
Date:Jul 11, 2013 5:40 PM Title:Re: Note about Gallery Tags
I agree that we need a system, but your suggested system is incompatible with the tagging guide as is, and it's wrong in some other ways as well. I don't have time to formulate a complete argument because I have to leave momentarily, but I will start now.
Tagging only by final form species is blatantly incomplete and inaccurate, particularly, but not exclusively, for Pokémon whose form changes radically between evolutions, such as Magikarp and Gyarados, or Dragonair and Dragonite. Even for ones which don't, it is still conceivable that someone would want to search exclusively for the lesser-evolved one or vice versa. (E.g., "dratini -dragonair".)
Tagging for verbs only ignores things like sex toys, which are most definitely content. Also, "cum_inside" seems to be Danbooru and Gelbooru's term for the state where there is semen in lower orifices. I don't know why.