wiki pages need attention

I'd like to point out a few suggestions for some of the wiki pages.

howto:comment has many of its serious guidelines covered in spoiler text.

yuri specifies:

"Basically, there needs to be something in the picture that makes it clear that the girls are more than just friends, otherwise it is not yuri."

This is ambiguous and has provoked arguments over whether or not marriage implies yuri. The wiki could also be clarified to make it obvious that a spoken_heart, shared_food, and hugging don't, on their own, imply yuri.

yuri specifies:

"Basically, there needs to be something in the picture that makes it clear that the girls are more than just friends, otherwise it is not yuri."

This is ambiguous and has provoked arguments over whether or not marriage implies yuri. The wiki could also be clarified to make it obvious that a spoken_heart, shared_food, and hugging don't, on their own, imply yuri.

Oh yes they do.

anon153 said:
howto:comment has many of its serious guidelines covered in spoiler text.

It's because the sample spoiler was broken sometime during the last few updates that modified it's behavior. I'd fix it myself, but I don't have authorization to unlock the page, apparently.

anon153 said:
The wiki could also be clarified to make it obvious that a spoken_heart, shared_food, and hugging don't, on their own, imply yuri.

Fencedude said:
Oh yes they do.

It depends on context and the level of intimacy depicted, I think each of those tags can often be enough on their own to indicate yuri (especially shared_food), but there are situations where each would exist that wouldn't.

* There needs to be two girls (this isn't generally the case)
* The tagged action has to be directed at one another (rather than say, spoken hearting food or something e.g. post #744169).
* It has to be mutual (post #856340 is sort of iffy in my mind, since it seems Kyouko isn't reciprocating)
* There has to be a level of intimacy beyond platonic friendship (this is intimate: post #899007, this is platonic: post #867341)

It seems that everything regarding yuri requires it not to be an implication, but rather blatant that there is romantic love between the two characters.

While hugging may imply yuri in the proper context, spoken heart is too vague and shared food can have other contexts as well.

The wiki explicitly states that it has to be either clearly romantic or sexual, so yeah.

Wouldn't tribadism by definition, fall under yuri?

Shinjidude said:
It depends on context and the level of intimacy depicted,

Well obviously.

Anelaid said:
It seems that everything regarding yuri requires it not to be an implication, but rather blatant that there is romantic love between the two characters.

Depends on the level of implication, but jesus, what is with people who keep trying to keep the Yuri tag off of some posts?

Wouldn't tribadism by definition, fall under yuri?

Assuming that its only girls involved (and its generally hard to get a guy involved in two girls tribbing), yes.

Anelaid said:
Wouldn't tribadism by definition, fall under yuri?

It's not impossible to have tribadism that isn't purely yuri. You could have a futa in the mix, or the girls can be fellating magical floating penises. I can't think of any single tag off the top of my head that would necessarily implicate yuri.

There's always lesbian, but that's an alias and not an implication.

while talking about yuri, what if one girl loves the other, but the other doesn't? is it yuri?
for instance, i'm thinking about all the pictures with the tags yuri and rape .

Also, pool #1885

Yuri rape is still yuri. The guidelines above mostly refer to romantic attraction between girls, while yuri rape is covered by the other definition of "girl-on-girl action". As you move further and further from the explicitness of rape, however, there's a point where nothing explicit enough is happening between the aggressor and the uninterested party that really warrants the yuri tag. misaka_mikoto shirai_kuroko -yuri chartags:2 is full of it.

Shinjidude said:

* The tagged action has to be directed at one another (rather than say, spoken hearting food or something e.g. post #744169).

Can we simply create an expressed love tag for that? If we can do that, we can then require the yuri tag to refer only to physical intimacy. The problems of non-intimate yuri can be resolved by doing this.

For the moment, I added to yuri "Evidence of a wedding between 2 girls is not significant enough to qualify a picture as yuri (see post #886318)." If nothing else, I think this is at least better than having a repeat of the same argument.

anon153 said:
For the moment, I added to yuri "Evidence of a wedding between 2 girls is not significant enough to qualify a picture as yuri (see post #886318)." If nothing else, I think this is at least better than having a repeat of the same argument.

And I completely do not agree with this position.

I've seen enough pics where there are multiple girls in an image, decked out in full bridal splendor, and the caption (either in the image or provided by the author) is something along the lines of "Well, honey? Which of us will you marry?"

That's more than enough to break any link between that scenario and yuri.

sgcdonmai said:

That's more than enough to break any link between that scenario and yuri.

No shit, and those images wouldn't get tagged yuri.

But goddamn NanoFate? Seriously? You're going to argue with 7+ years of NanoFate?

That's information extraneous to the image, Fencedude. You know just as well as I that we don't tag based on that.

On the other hand there is such a thing as artist intent, which is usually used to "break ties" when it comes to tagging something one way or the other. If the artist draws two girls in wedding gear, and it's clear either from the image or from his commentary or whatever that the girls are marrying each other, yuri should apply.

Shinjidude said:
If the artist draws two girls in wedding gear, and it's clear either from the image or from his commentary or whatever that the girls are marrying each other, yuri should apply.

The clarity of the image depends on whether or not the viewer is wearing their yuri goggles or not.

anon153 said:
For the moment, I added to yuri "Evidence of a wedding between 2 girls is not significant enough to qualify a picture as yuri (see post #886318)." If nothing else, I think this is at least better than having a repeat of the same argument.

Actually it's the complete opposite. Evidence of wedding between 2 girls is more than enough to qualify picture as yuri. The problem with post #886318 is that there is no such evidence: we see 2 girls in wedding dresses and... nothing more. No single suggestion that it's the picture of wedding couple and not photo session of wedding dresses gallery, for example.