TeaLeaf
@Ciaran
Thank you for the clarification, I’ll leave those tags alone, then! This was a very thorough and helpful explanation.
It makes me warm, deep inside, that we are putting such careful thought into, and using maths to understand, butts.This is a good day.
* edits
tag, and I can’t think of any of them that did it through a DNP. Most just ask if we can set it up and we do.*,edit
images should be moved the the * edit
tag. Maybe a description could be added to each tag making the separation canonical.* edit
tags where the artist specifically asked that we NOT reference the tags together in any public way, so there is o way to make all the tags like these uniform across all artists, or to provide the information you’re asking for in all cases.* edit
tag and add some instructions to the descriptions.artist:* edit[s]
tags, and only a few with descriptions set up…so I looked, and indeed there are. Either I never noticed, or I forgot, or somehow the notion of having noticed the few that do have descriptions blotted out the memory of those that don’t.artist:* edit[s]
tags that have more than 1 post apiece, 704 posts aren’t also tagged with the edit
tag - and for the opposite, 2358 posts are tagged with edit
and the original, non-suffixed artist tag.artist:* edit[s]
ought to be very likely to truly be edit
s. The reverse might not be true - I see people, such as artists themselves, misuse tags like color edit or nude edit, which imply edit
, while the posts should instead be alternate version
s. So, adding edit
blindly to the first set might be safe-ish, but the latter (sadly bigger) set probably would need more attention if there’d be an effort to convert to artist:* edit[s]
tags.color edit
are not tagged edit
- most of which are old, so I’d guess there was a point in time before which color edit
didn’t imply edit
- and a handful of newer ones like >>1652648 were mis-applications of the tag where edit
got (correctly) removed later, but color edit
did not. (The hunch was that this was a cause of artist:* edit[s]
-tagged posts lacking edit
but that didn’t turn out to be significant.)…* edit
tags where the artist specifically asked that we NOT reference the tags together in any public way …
But the artist hasn’t uploaded anything here for 4 years, so whatever is done, it’s just for legacy purposes. And I’m sorry, but there’s no other information here on the site to go by.
I’m not even sure if aliasing them is practical - I haven’t looked to see how each of these tags are being used in filters or watch lists, trying to merge them, or permanently separate them, might have unintended consequences.
[…]
PS: there’s slightly more than two dozen people hiding or watching the edit tag. I’m not sure if removing the ability to do that by aliasing the tags would be a problem. It might be better to move all the edits to the* edit
tag and add some instructions to the descriptions.
Maybe the*,edit
images should be moved the the* edit
tag. Maybe a description could be added to each tag making the separation canonical.What do you think should be done?
artist:* edit[s]
tags with the plain artist tag plus the edit
tag, or - if people really want to be able to track whose work was edited (in complicated situations, for example, where a picture is a composite that includes one artist’s edited work and another artist’s original work) retain the artist:* edit[s]
tag and add the plain artist tag and edit
.edit
and artist:*
together instead of requiring a * edits
tag for every artist (or “this character’s butt” or “this character with muscles”, etc. ad infinitum)Is this a problem now because someone started uploading edits of this artists work again? Or is is this causing some other problem? Because with such old tags, with so many images on them, poking them might cause more problems than it fixes. So it would be good to have a better handle on what the problem we are trying to fix is.
Do you have bulk tag editing and can you just move them? If so, let me know what you think the instructions should say on the tags.
feather bangs gets all the mares, featherdarling, fondbangs, feathersong
Hey everyone!
I have added a short description to Applejack’s Hat And done the full cleaning of Tallulah tag while adding the Applejack’s Hat one instead, the greatest majority of images indeed never warrant that tag to begin with and aj’s hat was better suitable.
Now I do not consider this an alias worthy case and I think this process is completed but if anyone thinks there’s anything else to be done here please voice it up~
applejack's hat
. So, is it time to alias it yet?Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!