Pointless Pools

Kaleidoscoped said:

female gaze hetero cannot be distilled into male focus because (emphasis mine):

I see. It also encapsulates some hypothetical -female_focus (which I do understand why we don't have). Thanks for spelling it out.

Knowledge_Seeker said:

How many times must the purpose of this pool be explained...?

Here's forum #261444 for an example of why the pool should stay. The reason I have no issue with that pool when compared to the pool I'm trying to nuke is that there is a very clear, often very hard to search for, purpose to it, and many people (myself included) find it a very helpful pool overall, and you simply cannot boil it down to one or two tags.

"Female Gaze" on the other hand is a complete mishmash of posts, with an overly broad theme that helps no one, and is also notably managed by only one person (a member, of course).

Still, wouldn't female gaze be useful as a stand alone tag? It would be useful for girls(or gay men) to find images like post #9511409.

ElChapulin said:

Still, wouldn't female gaze be useful as a stand alone tag? It would be useful for girls(or gay men) to find images like post #9511409.

You mean male focus or bishounen? Het for women is the only thing hard to search for because the overwhelming amount of straight (and honestly gay as well) porn on this site is by men for men. Your suggestion also ignores the fact that male-focus targeted at women and art targeted at men are completely different in tone.

This pool is fine and hard to search for otherwise.

The bulk update request #42854 (forum #362696) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

The bulk update request #43076 (forum #363638) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.

The bulk update request #42610 (forum #361651) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

Edit: I forgot I can delete pools, oops

pool #11054 really seems to be the same as pool #8183, tbh. Do we really need both? I'm not seeing many posts in Accurately Depicted Animals that wouldn't also fit in Beautiful Animals, barring some human focus posts that really shouldn't be in ADA to begin with (post #3330997), and I'm gonna garden those out in a sec.

Cleaned up. In practice it is just a Beautiful Animals clone, and in concept it's literally just "a post depicts an animal that looks like how an animal should look" which seems way, way too broad for a pool.

BUR #43655 has been approved by @evazion.

mass update pool:11054 -> pool:8183 -pool:11054

Here's a BUR for the above after doing some cleanup of both (and also a bit of gardening of Beautiful Animals). There's 51 posts that are in both which isn't a great sign when they have 220 and 395 posts respectively.

BaiserLaVerite said:

pool #10125
This pool seems redundant now that the flat chest joke tag exists. For that matter, pool #12023 could easily be replaced by convenient breasts and the creation of a flat chest pride tag.

true

BUR #44213 is pending approval.

nuke pool:1636

The only qualification to be added to the pool is if you want it to be real, which could be anything and everything on this site considering how many amazing concepts/idea people have drawn. Seems this pool is acting more like a favgroup than containing a unified idea between the pictures now.

zaregoto said:

BUR #44213 is pending approval.

nuke pool:1636

The only qualification to be added to the pool is if you want it to be real, which could be anything and everything on this site considering how many amazing concepts/idea people have drawn. Seems this pool is acting more like a favgroup than containing a unified idea between the pictures now.

I always thought that pool was supposed to be for things that could viably become a product (ignoring copyright-related issues) and not things like regular crossover pics. Would explicitly narrowing the focus help?

Blank_User said:

I always thought that pool was supposed to be for things that could viably become a product (ignoring copyright-related issues) and not things like regular crossover pics. Would explicitly narrowing the focus help?

It would also probably help if one particular user hadn't commandeered the pool to add literally anything Gundam related to it.

Blank_User said:

I always thought that pool was supposed to be for things that could viably become a product (ignoring copyright-related issues) and not things like regular crossover pics. Would explicitly narrowing the focus help?

The extremely vague description doesn't help either.
The pool is being used as a "cool_idea" tag, when it should be about things that could theoretically be produced as fan merchandise (as shown by pool #7061).

Ignoring the crossover spam the rest of the pool is stuff like

objectification post #1994457 post #972506
character select post #793674 post #5666609
fake cover post #1244343 post #1882700
merchandise post #1178018 post #7886080 and character doll post #2391678 post #5216393

I think we have tags more descriptive than this pool is.

pool #25773

This one feels kinda eh.

I've just been using the transformation tag for that since I upload a character that deals with this exact scenario but not sure if that's a misuse of the tag; and if it is, this definitely feels like a completely taggable scenario that doesn't need a pool to go with it.

Yeah, that one feels like it can be its own tag. It's flatout a fetish I think, going by my encounters with the concept, so it definitely should be a tag.

Don't got a good tag name for it though.

BUR #44331 has been approved by @evazion.

mass update pool:2353 -> stage_connection
nuke pool:2353

So I was giving a look at the connection tags the other day and I discovered that stage connection was created to replace pool #2353 nearly 11 years ago in forum #100282. There were some attempts to bring discussion to it, but those went pretty much unnoticed. Both the pool and the tag even share similar descriptions. I hope I didn't miss any important discussions on this subject...

With that said, stage connection is pretty much a Touhou only tag with very few other copyright tags used (Len'en, a single picture from Mega Man Zero that I personally added and... Pikmin?) so maybe nuking it would be better instead? I'm not quite sure what's preferable here, I'm not entirely familiar with Danbooru's standards yet.

I'm interested to see everyone's opinions on this.

Ahh, and there are also some pictures on the pool that do not have the stage connection tag, so I think the mass update should be taking care of it in case it does get nuked.

An update would help catch any posts not already tagged stage connection, so I say it's worth it. An update is typical of pools that can be replaced with tags too.

rainyd said:

BUR #44331 has been approved by @evazion.

mass update pool:2353 -> stage_connection
nuke pool:2353

So I was giving a look at the connection tags the other day and I discovered that stage connection was created to replace pool #2353 nearly 11 years ago in forum #100282. There were some attempts to bring discussion to it, but those went pretty much unnoticed. Both the pool and the tag even share similar descriptions. I hope I didn't miss any important discussions on this subject...

With that said, stage connection is pretty much a Touhou only tag with very few other copyright tags used (Len'en, a single picture from Mega Man Zero that I personally added and... Pikmin?)

Oh, the Pikmin one is mine. I think I added it to post #7045687 because it depicts all final bosses, and I couldn't think of a better tag than stage connection at the time. If there's a better tag for it, I can move it out of there.

I think stage connection should be applied to further copyrights outside shoot-em-ups like Touhou, but what do I know?