[REJECTED] Conforming "lipstick" Tagging

BUR #1929 has been rejected.

create alias red_lipstick -> red_lips
create alias purple_lipstick -> purple_lips
create alias pink_lipstick -> pink_lips
create alias green_lipstick -> green_lips
create alias blue_lipstick -> blue_lips
create alias brown_lipstick -> brown_lips
create alias aqua_lipstick -> aqua_lips
create alias yellow_lipstick -> yellow_lips
create alias white_lipstick -> white_lips
create alias orange_lipstick -> orange_lips
create alias grey_lipstick -> grey_lips
create alias silver_lipstick -> silver_lips
create alias lavender_lipstick -> lavender_lips

Reason: Rather pointless having *_lipstick variants when that should only hold true for lipstick_tube colouring itself, which again isn't worth keeping as separate entities for the sake of tag cleanliness. Rather than the indication of what colour of the lipstick it is we are referring more towards the colour applied to the lips themselves.

Chinatsu already brought up a topic about this a long while ago so I thought I'd readdress it again due to the mods being active, and available now.
Source: topic #13804

EDIT: This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

EDIT: This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1929 (forum #153857) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

Ok, maybe the tag itself is pointless, but the alias is a no-go until it's manually cleaned up, since according to wiki it's currently used both for lipstick applied to lips and lipstick in a lipstick tube, meaning there can be a red_lipstick on a post withoutred lips (or any lips visible).

Type-kun said:

Ok, maybe the tag itself is pointless, but the alias is a no-go until it's manually cleaned up, since according to wiki it's currently used both for lipstick applied to lips and lipstick in a lipstick tube, meaning there can be a red_lipstick on a post withoutred lips (or any lips visible).

I mean, I'm fine with going around and nuking the left over wikis myself but how many times do you actually see colour specific lipstick tubes being something people genuinely concern themselves with looking for in pictures? Not trying to sound offensive in the connotation there either.

It would seem from these tag counts that no one is really following a consistent line on tagging here:

Post count for red_lips -red_lipstick : 1985
Post count for red_lipstick -red_lips: 2246

I would say there is one potential distinction in that someone's lips can be naturally red or peach colored without having lipstick applied. Just tagging red_lips when that's the color and additionally tagging lipstick (or lipgloss) to indicate if the coloring isn't natural should be enough.

As for colored lipstick tubs, what's the significance of the color when unapplied? Compare it to, say, blue_ramune or red_hairclip. This seems like a bit of an excess for something no one will search for or find to be significant. In what situation would you want or need to specify the color of a the lipstick in a tube?

I agree with the aliases but we'll still need to allow for applications of lipstick off of lips, as in lipstick_mark or use of lipstick in smearing or drawing. I'd understand the desire for tags showing a color of a mark on someone's cheek or other smears and drawing done with a color of lipstick.

---
Going to quote in some people from the last thread

@iridescent_slime said:

Just one thing: what will this alias do for the red lipstick -> lipstick implication? Should red lips imply lipstick?

I don't think so. As I mentioned, we should tag lipstick with the appearance of it being applied on ones lips, not just based on lips being a certain color. One could say though perhaps that, any non-naturally colored shade of lips should have an implication (i.e., blue_lips -> lipstick).

@忍猫 said:

Is there a resolution to this topic? The way that the wiki is written now makes it seem like both red lips and red lipstick tube should implicate red lipstick, while not mentioning any other situation where lips would appear red.

I disagree with having the red_lipstick tag and agree with the OP's aliases. I also don't see a point in tagging x_lipstick_tube as explained but would see merit in tagging the color for applications of lipstick on surfaces besides lips.

The primary concern I have with tagging *_lips for color is that it seems to go hand-in-hand with blatant misuse of the lips tag for lips that are barely noticeable. I mentioned this once before in forum #133282, but I guess it bears repeating now, since it's still an ongoing problem.

Then again, lips is such a hopeless mess at this point we might be better off nuking it altogether.

iridescent_slime said:

The primary concern I have with tagging *_lips for color is that it seems to go hand-in-hand with blatant misuse of the lips tag for lips that are barely noticeable. I mentioned this once before in forum #133282, but I guess it bears repeating now, since it's still an ongoing problem.

Then again, lips is such a hopeless mess at this point we might be better off nuking it altogether.

That's unfortunately part of a bigger issue with standard human features being tagged. Last time we brought this up in topic #14889, @Type-kun's pointed out in the discord that the use of those tags would be to distinguish posts that, for example, have straight lines as mouths or no visible ears from those who have detailed versions (his point is the reason why I didn't start working on the tags listed in my last reply in that topic). I'm not sure on the utility of having such thing but it's a mess that nobody wants to touch.

iridescent_slime said:

The primary concern I have with tagging *_lips for color is that it seems to go hand-in-hand with blatant misuse of the lips tag for lips that are barely noticeable. I mentioned this once before in forum #133282, but I guess it bears repeating now, since it's still an ongoing problem.

Yes, that's a real concern that needs addressing, although the x_lips tags don't imply lips and I don't think anyone is suggesting that. I certainly think that would be a very bad idea and I can see if you think the similarity in the tags would lead people to errantly add the lips tag.

Then again, lips is such a hopeless mess at this point we might be better off nuking it altogether.

Well, clearly you have some desire for it to regret it's state. I definitely would like to have the tag too.

For a solution, I suggest a tag for lips that dictates better usage. Maybe defined lips?

nonamethanks said:

That's unfortunately part of a bigger issue with standard human features being tagged. Last time we brought this up in topic #14889, @Type-kun's pointed out in the discord that the use of those tags would be to distinguish posts that, for example, have straight lines as mouths or no visible ears from those who have detailed versions (his point is the reason why I didn't start working on the tags listed in my last reply in that topic). I'm not sure on the utility of having such thing but it's a mess that nobody wants to touch.

There's clearly a community interest and topic #14889 gained some support. The discussion needs to be continued. This is the right approach to reducing tag dilution for facial anatomy, including for lips.

Unfortunately people will always tag what they see, no matter how little defined a feature is or how specifically we define things on the wiki. If the name of a tag doesn't reflect the ideal we have for a tag, it will repeatedly fail no matter how many hours people sink into gardening for corrections.

chinatsu said:

One could say though perhaps that, any non-naturally colored shade of lips should have an implication (i.e., blue_lips -> lipstick).

Just to say, I don't think this should happen either. What is natural for humans isn't necessarily natural for all the various humanoid (or non-humanoid) beings that are to be found on danbooru.
And that's before you get into the fact that lips that are blue (or various other abnormal colours) can occur naturally as a result of certain medical conditions.

What about the possibility of improperly applied or messed up lipstick, where it is definitely noticeable as such? Do we still apply the colored versions of the tag there?

Type-kun said:

Ok, maybe the tag itself is pointless, but the alias is a no-go until it's manually cleaned up, since according to wiki it's currently used both for lipstick applied to lips and lipstick in a lipstick tube, meaning there can be a red_lipstick on a post withoutred lips (or any lips visible).

Tagging a red lipstick tube as red lipstick is incorrect already, since red lipstick implies makeup and makeup is supposed to be for applied makeup only. Cosmetics is supposed to be the tag for lipstick tubes.

Anyway, I didn't see many posts under *_lipstick lipstick_tube that were using *_lipstick to describe lipstick tubes. I moved the ones I saw from *_lipstick to *_lipstick_tube + *_lips.

ampzz said:

I mean, I'm fine with going around and nuking the left over wikis myself but how many times do you actually see colour specific lipstick tubes being something people genuinely concern themselves with looking for in pictures? Not trying to sound offensive in the connotation there either.

I moved some posts to *_lipstick_tube just to disambiguate things for now, but I do think these tags should be nuked.

iridescent_slime said:

The primary concern I have with tagging *_lips for color is that it seems to go hand-in-hand with blatant misuse of the lips tag for lips that are barely noticeable. I mentioned this once before in forum #133282, but I guess it bears repeating now, since it's still an ongoing problem.

I don't want to encourage more people to misuse lips either, but *_lipstick and *_lips need to be merged and *_lips is the only way it can go.

Maybe lips should be renamed, but that's outside the scope of this request, and I don't want this request to be roadblocked because we can't figure out how to fix lips at the same time.

skylightcrystal said:

Just to say, I don't think this should happen either. What is natural for humans isn't necessarily natural for all the various humanoid (or non-humanoid) beings that are to be found on danbooru.
And that's before you get into the fact that lips that are blue (or various other abnormal colours) can occur naturally as a result of certain medical conditions.

Widowmaker (overwatch) is an example of a character who naturally has purple lips (or at least, has purple lips without necessarily wearing lipstick).

tapnek said:

What about the possibility of improperly applied or messed up lipstick, where it is definitely noticeable as such? Do we still apply the colored versions of the tag there?

I'd say use smeared lipstick + <color>_lips or <color>_lipstick_mark (if we really need tags for lipstick mark colors).

One more thing: the *_lipstick -> lipstick implications would need to be removed before aliasing anything, otherwise they'll be carried over to the *_lips tags.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.

The bulk update request #1929 (forum #153857) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

evazion said:
Maybe lips should be renamed, but that's outside the scope of this request, and I don't want this request to be roadblocked because we can't figure out how to fix lips at the same time.

One year later... Bump.

We should also figure out how to fix the mess with colored nails and toenails at some point, which is in similar deep waters as a set of tags, btw (toenail_polish/nail polish, colored_nails but not colored_toenails, etc).

Basically I think we should alias all <color>_lipstick tags to <color>_lips, then imply them to colored lips instead of lipstick. That way we can still have an umbrella tag for colored lips without the whole problem of "is this lipstick or is it their natural lip color?" Compare colored lips with colored eyelashes and colored pubic hair.