Tags you should (not) use

piespy said: Oh, so antenna hair is a dual ahoge? That seems a bit... arbitrary, but OK.

Well, what do you think of when you hear 'antenna'? For me it's the antenna on an insect, which are paired. Or the 'rabbit ears' antenna on an old TV. So I don't think it's arbitrary. It's a term I've heard many times before used in precisely that way.

As EB notes, ahoge might be a catch-all term for pointy hair thingies, but it makes sense to keep them separate. And skimming over the images under each, it seems like they're being used consistently so I can't see a good reason to merge them when it's not a problem.

EmperorBrandon said:
What I thought is that "antenna hair" is still considered "ahoge". At least it seems the Japanese wiki entry on "ahoge" http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%9B%E6%AF%9B includes it. Can't read most of it but there is an illustration there.

The pic's captions says "when doubled, it's called »antennae« instead". So no, it specifically says no to ahoge in that case.

葉月 said:
So no, it specifically says no to ahoge in that case.

M-M-M-Monster Fail. Real the article, it says quite the opposite.

葉月 said:
The pic's captions says "when doubled, it's called »antennae« instead". So no, it specifically says no to ahoge in that case.

I think not, because that article also says 「頭部から1本（または複数本）触角のように飛び出して立っている毛のこともアホ毛と呼ぶ」. It means "A single (or plural) hair sticking out from the head like an antenna is also called 'ahoge'".

Even if 'antennae_hair' can be considered ahoge, it's probably better to keep them seperate since antennae hair is a known variant. Otherwise you'll end up with 'braids', 'single_braid', 'twin_braids', artificial distinction again.

post #241169
post #141185

What would be the appropriate tag to use? According to the kneeling tag, you rest on your lower legs instead of on your butt. But the girls seem to be resting on both. I added a kneeling tag just for simplicity's sake since her knees are bent, but do you think I'm misusing the tag in this case?

http://miezaru.donmai.us/post/index?tags=status%3Aundefined

What exactly is this tag supposed to be? Given how the posts seem totally unrelated to each other in the bigger scope, as well as the format of the tag I'm suspecting some form of glitch, but is this the case?

forum #6429

Sorta related to this thread: Is there/should there be a formal policy on when and when not to differentiate copyright tags of sequels and such?

I described to someone in a comment that "Direct sequels with largely the same character cast (Code Geass R2, Rozen Maiden Traumend, Higurashi no Naku Koro no Kai, etc) aren't usually given their own tags", but this is vague. What's the big difference between Nanoha A's and Rozen Maiden Traumend, for instance, that merits the former a tag of its own, but not the latter?

7HS said: What's the big difference between Nanoha A's and Rozen Maiden Traumend, for instance, that merits the former a tag of its own, but not the latter?

Far bigger difference in cast, as well as some outfit modifications. It's not an exact science, but we would have needed a separate tag for StrikerS anyway, so there you have it. Plus they're all available under the mahou_shoujo_lyrical_nanoha umbrella.

I am not really sure if this is the correct place to talk about this, but I think is the one that fits most.
I've been "working" to remove some double-misspelled-wrong_written-tags, and in the process, I reached this three:

super_rosa_chinensis
super_rosa_foetida
super_rosa_gigantea

(and some others similar to these)
As far as I know, those are the names (grades) of three characters from Maria_sama_ga_miteru, but I don't think the words "super" and "rosa" are used correctly.

"Super" in this case it feels somehow irrelevant, and "rosa" is Spanish for "rose" (now, I don't want to have a fight over this). My suggestion is to use only the last part (chinensis, foetida & gigantea) of those tags in order to avoid future confusions.

Last thing: I haven't watched Maria_sama (my bad XP) so... If someone have a better idea...well.

The "super" rosas are characters that don't have an specific name in the series (they appear a little in extra stories), instead they're called like that (Super Rosa Foetida, Super Rosa Chinensis, etc) So I think those tags shouldn't be removed because they're the official nickname/title and basically, you can't call them otherwise.

They're named after the binomial classifications of three species of rose:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_foetida
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_chinensis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_gigantea

So taking "rosa" off would be ludicrous. Anyway, I'm with FeKa on this one.

I tagged post #185690 and post #245339 'sulking'.
If you have a better idea what to call that pose (or some suitable tag already exists), feel free to change it, or if you know any other posts that are similar, tag them too.

How should we interpret watercolor? There's more and more software that emulates the style that it's getting almost to the point where it's difficult to determine whether traditional media applies or not. The most recent example would be post #266243. While I feel it's fairly obviously CG this time, it's also fairly obvious that the watercolour style was being emulated.

On a tag-related note, I don't see anything anywhere...what are the guidelines on aliasing? (Is the basic even allowed to alias? I haven't tried...)

PS: Just to be sure, does this thread function as the place to ask any questions about various tags one might have?

You could ask here, though it might be more expedient to just make a thread about it. By the way, have you read forum #5355 ? It might answer some of your questions. As for aliases, I'm pretty sure anyone can submit one, but only the mods can approve them.

0xCCBA696 said: As for aliases, I'm pretty sure anyone can submit one, but only the mods can approve them.

Only admins can, so that's just albert, Franz Einfalsch and memento mori.

browsing the "pipe" tag, I noticed that a lot of them are specifically kiseru, a Japanese type of pipe with a smaller bowl:
http://www.loringpage.com/oriental/abetterkiseru.jpg

for example, post #256880 and post #108416 contain kiseru, in contrast to post #170233, which contains a "Western"-style pipe. should the pictures containing kiseru be tagged as such?

if I'm just being too nitpicky, then disregard. I don't know if anyone would care or know about kiseru to search for them on here.

I'm not certain how albert feels about his database, but my personal inclination is always that more non-redundant metadata is never a bad thing. Defining what constitutes the threshold for redundancy is a bit of an adventure, but that's how it goes, I guess. Perhaps "kiseru implies pipe" would be in order (though what was it about implications? They have high overhead in some dimension, I think...)?

PS: If kiseru ends up being a good idea, it would probably also be a good idea to update pipe and kiseru so the curious know what it's about. In general, I try to maintain and add cross-references when I edit wiki pages in that manner.

Firstly, I don't intend to be rude to anyone or their drawings.

Is oekaki used for not high quality drawings that have color? Or in other words, crappy? Not that they don't have meaning, because I've seen a few that I'd like to see drawn a lot better, but that's the problem. Would I be missing any good quality pics by searching without oekaki?

I'd also like to bring up that censorship is a very important tag that should be added to just about every picture. I personally don't like censored pics because the censorship can get pretty out of hand most of the time. I also never found a point to censor something, for the exceptions of tv and radio for obvious reasons. Does a censored pussy classify as not explicit? Since censored pics are also explicit on danbooru, pictures should be shown the way the artist drew it (although it is not our decision when all we have is a censored pic.) [For the follwing sentence refer to the next post by jhx2154]Tag it censored or uncensored (if there is anything that may be explicit, such as a penis or vagina.)

Just saying, StarlitVoyager brought up a great point about posture (it should also be used in every pic that has a posture.)

@ Fef-Vii 40+ tags is ok, as long as they all describe what is going on in the picture. Your limit is anything that is in every single pic in danbooru, such as eyebrows, forehead, mouth, etc. Use your common sense to know what is redundant and what is acceptable. The hard part is how specific you need to get. Everyday a new fetish is born, and that means there needs to be a tag for said fetish.

Shaved_male_armpits may be a little too excessive for someone like you and me, but someone likes it. However, are you going to edit a pic that has shaved male armpits as such? No, so unless the shaved male armpits fetishist finds that pic, he'll never know. So tags do have something to do with popularity. However, something like censorship, or posture may not be popular, but is necessary for every pic.

So you NEED to add these tags, but for something that is not necessary for every pic you can basically forget about it until it becomes popular. In this topic you can see which tags should be known (this means, you can find this tag in a lot of pics.) Shaved male armpits isn't in a lot of pics, so it's not important.

I would like to add "lowleg" to the list of tags to be aware of. Mainly because of its growing popularity (almost at 1000.)

Oral sex is just that. Sex. You should get one with the other. Sex can then branch down to Vaginal, Anal, Oral. And then the subcategories for oral. There is no other reasoning for this, since these categories are always branched down as so. (Ex. Giving a blowjob already describes what type of sex.)

Lastly, I understand what surasshu said about "vintage" pics, but albert said it himself, he doesn't want real women, this site is not for that. So can we start deleting them all? Real photos is a totally different classification, like child porn. Bestiality is still drawn, so we can keep the old stuff. (Yeah this isn't much of a strong argument... just bringing it up.)