General Tag Discussion

The characters in Equestria Girls are, canonically, Human; aside from the aggravation of having to add tags to a bajillion images, is there any good reason not to just go with eqg human?

@TexasUberAlles  
Because Equestria Girls humans are unique to Equestria Girls and no other series in existence (including all non-Hasbro ones).
 
It’s like asking for a “pony (my little pony)” tag. It’s pointless, because MLP ponies themselves are unique to My Little Pony.

@TexasUberAlles  
How are they “canon human”? Does someone in the show ever refer to “humans”?
 
For all we know they might be Jaffa.

@Ciaran  
I don’t think they’re ever referred to as humans, though they technically are 😊

@☬ lincolnbrewsterfan ☬  
Technically, on this site, “Humanized, EQG” is a thing. If EQG are already human how do you humanize them?
 
So, EQG are not, as far as this site is concerned, “Human”, as there are thousands of images where artists have imagined what the EQG characters would look like if they were humans.

@Ciaran  
That’s a good point actually 😮
 
I guess in canon they are semi-human (since they can pony up or become ponies when crossing the mirror). 😄

I find it interesting how the tags for multiple images make it evident people are having disagreements over whether Lightning Chill is a jaguar or a tiger.
 
Which in turn gives me a question: Should she be tagged as a tiger or a jaguar? I myself thought for sure she was a tiger.

@☬ lincolnbrewsterfan ☬  
Pretty sure they refer to themselves as humans at least once.
 
Of course they are in their own world and all.
 
@Algebroot Neogears  
The thing is, nobody (at least very rarely) uploads things resembling actual IRL ponies here. Whereas humans in various drawn and photographed styles are here already. Gotta separate them.

@Algebroot Neogears  
I don’t know why anyone would think she’s a jaguar. She’s clearly got stripes, the most defining feature of a tiger.

@LightningBolt  

 
Yeah.

@Blissful690  
So all the background ponies who add the “jaguar (animal)” tag are wrong then.

@Ciaran  
Does someone in the show ever refer to ‘humans’?  
 

Patec’s artist tag is not connected to his Derpibooru profile for some reason.
 
Also - he barely uses it now, but his Deviantart isn’t linked to the Derpibooru page either.
 
_{I think he used to be a moderator, but I’m not sure. 🤔}
 
@TexasUberAlles  
Thanks. I thought so. 🙂

@Ciaran  
@TexasUberAlles
 
I’ve noticed this myself.
 
I first read it on the ‘humans’ page from the Friendship is Magic Wikia.
 
Contrarywise, I mentioned this subject on this thread before and it received some interesting replies. Here, in spite of what the wikia says, the characters in the Equestria Girls dimension are not human and should be marked with the ‘equestrian girls’ tag unless they are portrayed as standard human beings.
 
Personally, I find it rather odd.

I mean, it seems kindasorta super obvious they’re just Humans from a world where hominins got All The Colors instead of just earth tones; there’s absolutely nothing to suggest they’re anything else.

I wonder, what is the purpose of G4 tag. When this tag should be added?
 
Also I think a tag macro/micro should imply both macro and micro.

@Brainless-Mind  
Changing it requires some careful moves and planning.
 
@Markiz93  
Eventually we’re gonna have the G4 tag on lots of images. It’s been a slowly creeping issue with things, that we started with only one gen to worry about, but now there’s basically 3.

@Markiz93  

I’ve seen that tag and wondered what it was for. Is it a categorical tag for any content with macro or micro, like an intensified “size difference” tag? If so, then the implication ought to be the other way around (but it’s kind of pointless since macro || micro achieves the same searching and filtering purpose.)
 
Or, is it for when there’s no point of reference, so maybe it’s a normal size character and an abnormal size character but you can’t tell which way (without external context/knowing the characters)?
 
For that matter, what differentiates “tiny” from “micro”? IMO, it’s like the relation of “barefoot” to “foot fetish” or “open mouth” to “oral fixation”…a sense of “you can tell when you see it” that the content was thought up by someone rather more invested in the idea than usual.
 
(“giant” is already aliased to “macro” but “tiny”/“tiny ponies” is not for “micro”, and “pocket pony” implies nothing [maybe because it could be a normal pony in a giant’s pocket, IDK]…)

Sorry for starting this discussion on Equestria Girls humans.
 
Noticed some tags on this picture.
 

 
cuteness overload, daaaaaaaaaaaw, hnnng, weapons-grade cute. Should they be aliased to cute? Or at least merged together?

@Roseluck  
They don’t look like stuff to be aliased to “cute” (as a matter of fact, three of those four already imply “cute”), but it does look like cuteness overload, daaaaaaaaaaaw, hnnng, and weapons-grade cute should be aliased between one another.

@Roseluck  
All those cute tags can imply different cute levels, so no. They shouldn’t be aliased.
 
_{although I’m probably biased because I love all those individual cute clarifications. Mostly cuteness overload and weapons-grade cute 😊}

@☬ lincolnbrewsterfan ☬  
Yes, they should aliased. The intent might have been for them to be different levels, but in practice they all get used together and the subject matter is too vague for people to be in agreement. Several redundant “next level cute” tags have already been aliased into weapons-grade cute for that reason, but then people just made new ones and started the problem all over again.
 
Personally speaking, I’d prefer we alias all of it to cute since we can’t seem to stop some overly-enthusiastic taggers from adding them to everything even mildly cute.
 
There should be some consideration for attempting to save “hnnng” because I believe it’s been misused over the years. My understanding is that it was supposed to be used for pictures that literally featured a heart attack from cuteness like this:  

 
The problem there is that it might be too far gone to save. Even if someone goes through and takes out all the examples that don’t feature a cuteness-enduced death, the same sort of people who derailed the tag in the first place will likely do so again.

@Background Pony #0299  
I can see your point. I love seeing all those separate ones, though (they’re all on my watched tags list).
 
Plus you might prefer to use a specific cute tag that another might not describe specifically enough. They probably shouldn’t be aliased.
 
At least I hope they won’t be. c:

What exactly is the purpose of the peeing from crotch tag? Isn’t that where pee usually comes from?

@Roseluck
 
Don’t apologize. From what I can tell, it’s a subject that has become rather confusing on this site.
 
I like to think that the bugs will be ironed out one day, but until then, we’ll have to sit tight.