General Tag Discussion

@TexasUberAlles  

 
I remember this, good times.  
The song

busty mrs. shy -> busty posey shy

synthesizer should imply musical instrument.
 
Don’t do this with keyboard, however, as long as we don’t have separate tags for the musical instrument and the computer input device. (And that’ll be a lot of work.)

I’m not sure if there’s a better thread for this, but idw micro series should probably be yellow.

@Frustration in Excelsis  
@Pulse Wave  
@Waspinator331
 
Done.

@Mildgyth  
I’m sorry, the first text didn’t have the right code, and that’s on me. But I fixed it now. So, if it’s not too much trouble, could you try it again?

@Mad Black  
Oh yes. It lodged in the wife’s memory and now she keeps singing it at me when I’m drunk.
 
So… all the time…

Do I tag males/females/futa only if the picture is a character, and a disembodied penis? Examples: (all explicit)  
>>2101805 (glory hole)  
>>2101481 (disembodied penis)  
>>2116299 (male? pov)  
>>2058518 (cropped; penis barely visible)
 
Or are they solo?

@Background Pony #A8E1  
I believe the “solo focus + male/female/futa focus” tags might be appropriate for those. Though not 100% sure on the disembodies penis and cropped one.

@Background Pony #A8E1  
None of those are solo and you shouldn’t be using males/females/futa only on images like that at all. From some ludicrous reason this isn’t written in any of their tag descriptions, but those tags (like the duo and trio tags) aren’t supposed to be used on shipping images or any image where there’s direct sexual contact between the characters depicted. Speaking of which, it does appear all three of those tags are yet again in need of some cleaning.

Why the Equestria Girls is removed from all tcn1205’s artworks? These girls looks exactly like in Equestria Girls design and most of them are EqG-related.
 
Even from this one, for example:  

 
This is just ridiculous.

@Markiz93  
I had removed the tag because their art style doesn’t match EQG style in the vast majority of their works.  
Some of the earlier piece might be appropriate for the tag. But almost all of them are more human than eqg.

pinkiebetes → diapinkes  
velvetbetes should imply cute and twilight velvet

@Zeb  
I would think that having characters with EqG coloration who are wearing the actual outfits they wear in EqG would kindasorta conclusively settle that issue; it’s obvious enough that if I’d stumbled across >>1476127 missing the equestria girls tag I would have added it as a matter of course without even checking to see if site staff had removed it. TCN1205, haibaratomoe, and dusty-munji all expressly set most of their Rarijack and Appledash art in the EqGverse, with most of EqG’s design cues intact even after being translated through their art styles.
 
They’re also all active on Tumblr on a daily basis and happy to interact with fans, so it would be pretty easy to ask them.

@Markiz93  
@Zeb
 
I mean. If they’re in their EG colorations, wearing their exact EG outfits and generally set in the EG verse, I’d assume they’re clearly meant to be Equestria Girls fanart. I think the context is clear enough even if the artist doesn’t use the show’s exact art style – almost all fanart of the main series doesn’t use show style either.
 
@TexasUberAlles  

 
Or we could do that.

@TexasUberAlles  
@Frustration in Excelsis  
As I said in my post:  

 
I’ll go through and fix it in a bit.  
But images like this:  

 
Aren’t EQG style, clothes, or anything at all.

@Zeb  
So, EQG refers to the style, not the origin of the characters?
 
I”m mainly asking because I’m getting PMs about it now.
 
Because for some reason people think I’m a tagging expert … I wish I was joking about that, I have no idea why people think that either.

@Derpy Whooves  
The style and strong references to it.  
Something like Sci-twi drawn completely as a pony and in no other way references eqg aside from her character being from that, wouldn’t get the EQG unless something else in the image was indicating it. That would just be among the Ponified tags.
 
A fully humanized scene interpretation would be tagged eqg too.
 
Since eqg came out people will often tag something EQG just because the humanized character has their pony skin color. But they forget that pony color on humanizations existed long before EQG was a thing. [No, this sentence is not directed at the current discussion of this specific artist. It’s just a general statement.]

@Zeb  
Ok, so just like Sunset Shimmer is not tagged “EQG” if she’s a pony, she’s also not tagged “EQG” if she’s a human.
 
Got it - thank you, that helps :)

@Zeb  
Those are pretty solidly not their Pony colorizations, though; there is a very clear difference between coat colors and skin colors in characters which have appeared in both series, and those are obviously the washed-out tones of EqG.

Outside maybe showing only the police vehicle/badge/logo/building/tape, is there any situation where police applies, yet not police officer?

@TexasUberAlles  
Exact matching aside, they’re still pony-like coloring and not human (or even Equestria Girls in this case) skin tone and hair color.

@Damaged  
They’re both a lot closer to EqG than FIM, this is not difficult to see.

@TexasUberAlles  
Okay, but that still doesn’t change the fact that the art style in use is not that of Equestria Girls.

@TexasUberAlles  
This is rediculous and I’m so confused what should I do to tag!! Ugh!😫