Topic: Invalidate implied_* tags

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Beholding

Member

The bulk update request #12645 is active.

change category implied_rape (0) -> invalid

Reason: See topic #60409.

Proposed wiki description:

"Implied" tags are too vague to be useful. Try one of these instead:

Having gone through almost the entirely of the tag, almost all posts are better described by one of these tags.

Earlier implied_* invalidation BURs that predate this thread are located at the following:

EDIT: The bulk update request #12645 (forum #472936) has been approved by @spe.

Updated

Beholding

Member

The bulk update request #12660 is active.

create alias implied_threesome (2) -> implied_group_sex (0)
create alias implied_gangbang (0) -> implied_group_sex (0)
change category implied_group_sex (0) -> invalid

Reason: See topic #60538.

Proposed description:

"Implied" tags are too vague to be useful. Try one of these instead:

EDIT: The bulk update request #12660 (forum #473225) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

alphamule

Member

... Isn't the point of implied is that it's hinted at or outright stated in the image?

TheGreatWolfgang

Privileged

alphamule said:
... Isn't the point of implied is that it's hinted at or outright stated in the image?

The whole point is to reduce dialogue-based tagging as much as possible due to it violating TWYS.
In most cases, the implied_* tags are subjective to the user tagging the post.

Beholding

Member

alphamule said:
... Isn't the point of implied is that it's hinted at or outright stated in the image?

See topic #60538 for discussion.

In brief, implied_* tags are not only subjective, they are overly broad, because something can be "implied" by many different things. It is better to tag based on the specific thing that implies the thing, because that's more objective and provides better granularity for searches. Thus why I've listed alternatives in the proposed wiki descriptions.

Beholding

Member

The bulk update request #12705 is active.

create alias hidden_penis (3) -> implied_penis (0)
create alias implied_erection (10) -> implied_penis (0)
change category implied_penis (0) -> invalid

Reason:

"Implied" tags are too vague to be useful. Try one of these instead:

EDIT: The bulk update request #12705 (forum #473909) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

Beholding

Member

The bulk update request #12713 is active.

change category implied_bondage (0) -> invalid

Reason:

"Implied" tags are too vague to be useful. Try one of these instead:

If you tagged this because the character is in a common bondage position (e.g. hands_behind_back) but no bonds are visible, then only tag the position and do not tag bondage, per Tag What You See.

EDIT: The bulk update request #12713 (forum #474002) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

Beholding

Member

The bulk update request #12716 is active.

create alias implied_killing (2) -> implied_violence (0)
create alias implied_murder (0) -> implied_violence (0)
create alias implied_snuff (6) -> implied_violence (0)
change category implied_violence (0) -> invalid

Reason:

"Implied" tags are too vague to be useful. Try one of these instead:

EDIT: The bulk update request #12716 (forum #474017) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

Beholding

Member

The bulk update request #12725 is active.

create alias implied_blowjob (2) -> implied_oral (0)
create alias implied_cunnilingus (1) -> implied_oral (0)
change category implied_oral (0) -> invalid

Reason:

"Implied" tags are too vague to be useful. Try one of these instead:

EDIT: The bulk update request #12725 (forum #474185) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

spe

Admin

A note for whoever ends up writing the wiki pages: it ought to be mentioned that, very often, these "implied" tags can safely be tagged as the thing itself. Most of implied_oral, for example, appears to just be plain oral or after_oral. You don't need to directly see mouth-to-genital contact to tag oral - a face shoved in a crotch is perfectly acceptable. Generally, evidence of a thing being or happening within a post is enough to tag said thing even if not seen directly, with a few exceptions.

bitez said:
should offscreen_fire would work?

firelight is a valid tag. This can be used when the light from a fire is visible but not the fire itself.

Beholding

Member

Sorry to ping you, @spe, but given people seem to be actually using implied_sex as a tag now, I think it's important the followup request to invalidate it be done sooner rather than later.