Posted under Tags
create implication :p -> smile
:P wiki states that it's "Smiling while sticking out the tongue."
EDIT: This tag implication is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.
EDIT: This tag implication has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.
EDIT: The tag implication :p -> smile (forum #149625) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
Updated by DanbooruBot
post #3225220 [nsfw]
-1 - there are plenty tagged :p that are not smiles, the wiki should just be changed, making this implication is going to just create the need for constant gardening.
chinatsu said:
post #3225220 [nsfw]
-1 - there are plenty tagged :p that are not smiles, the wiki should just be changed, making this implication is going to just create the need for constant gardening.
Then what would the difference between :p + :q and just tongue out be?
Unbreakable said:
Then what would the difference between :p + :q and just tongue out be?
:q is just licking lips. As far as :p it looks functionally equivalent to tongue_out
My suggestion would be alias :q to licking_lips, and :p to just tongue_out.
As far as yours, just looking at :p I perceive no smile in the characters, it's flat line with a tongue out, which to me suggests it's just a tongue being out, in any manner. I believe tags should be intuitive, users will not tag according to how the wiki is written. Changes on the forum and wiki are made with most users not being aware, so we can expect many to tag based on what they think the tag does.
chinatsu said:
:q is just licking lips. As far as :p it looks functionally equivalent to tongue_out
My suggestion would be alias :q to licking_lips, and :p to just tongue_out.
No, that's the licking lips tag, :q is just the tongue sticking up like in tehepero.
Also, I would never tag :p on a non-smiling character because that's not what the emote is.
Unbreakable said:
No, that's the licking lips tag, :q is just the tongue sticking up
Functionally what's the difference, can you point out examples?
Also, I would never tag :p on a non-smiling character because that's not what the emote is.
I'm disagreeing with that being the emote. If you have to say it just isn't what it looks like, then just how useful is that definition? Just search :p and you will find plenty of uses without a smile. Searching :p -smile shows even more. I don't see why you suggest we erase that distinction using an implication rather than just allowing :p to be modified with tags like smile, frown, smirk, expressionless, etc.
How about like post #3206828 ?
c933103 said:
How about like post #3206828 ?
looks to me like it forms a colon and p, so it's :p as :p can be from where I take this
chinatsu said:
Functionally what's the difference, can you point out examples?
:q - tongue is sticking straight up, as in post #3227081
licking_lips - some signs of sideways movement, as in post #3227548
those look the same to me. post #3212192 might be a better example of licking_lips. generally, the distinction probably comes down to comical vs erotic.
i agree with chinatsu that :p has nothing to do with smiling, however tongue_out would apply anytime the tongue is out of the mouth. :p is a more specific gesture.
The tag implication :p -> smile (forum #149625) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
