Please change the description of the "text" tag.

The description says that the bulk or meaning of an image is in text (e.g. screenshot of a twitter post). But unfortunately the vast majority of its use does not reflect its intended use anymore. So the description should be changed to represent what the majority its use actually is now, namely a image with any text in it.
 
I am sad now because missed a lot of submissions with this tag as I blocked it a couple years ago when people actually used it as it was intended :(.

The tag needs to be cleaned up, as with many, rather than have its meaning changed. Tags like ‘vagina’ are also grossly misused, but it shouldn’t be interchangeable with ‘vulva’ because of it. Just remove the tag from images where it doesn’t apply.

@Dragonpone  
removing the tag from images isn’t really feasible as the vast majority of its use is incorrect, resulting in pages of images used incorrectly for every image or two that uses it correctly. So it would be easier just to change the description as it makes sense that an image with text in it has the tag “text”.
 
Your vulva/vagina example doesn’t really apply as those two are physically different body parts. While the “text” tag can still be considered accurate if it’s for an image with text in it. A new tag could, and probably be should, be created called “mostly text” or something along that line.

@sgdragon  
Vagina is slang for the whole thing, so as far as many are concerned it is the same thing. That’s why it gets(incorrectly) tagged that way. There’s no point in having two separate tags for ‘a little bit of text’ and ‘a lot of text’. That’s probably why the text tag only specifies mostly text in the first place.
 
There’s not a ton that can be done about people misusing tags besides letting them know or in the worst case reporting them, so that’s why a lot of people go through images and try to tag them correctly. If you don’t want to do that you don’t have to, but my point is the descriptions shouldn’t change because of bad taggers. Especially since that might encourage haphazard tagging with the knowledge that tag descriptions don’t really matter and will change to suit their incorrect usage.

@sgdragon  
Naw, just takes a bit of sweepin up to clean it. Like Dragon said.  
I’ll make it a personal project of mine. Might have a way to do it quickly soon, but either way. It’s something that’ll at least start to be cleaned up within the next couple of weeks.

@Zeb  
I’ll throw in some help too.

All that being said, one thing that has frequently bothered me is that we don’t really have a tag for images with just a little bit of text. If we could solve that issue, it would help prevent the text tag from becoming cluttered again.

@DragonWraith  
I just don’t see much of a point of having a tag for smaller amounts of text. What would be an example of an image with it? I feel like text, wall of text, and caption could cover any image if used right.
 
And on an unrelated note, I’m mildly amused by the fact that three of the users here have ‘dragon’ in their username.

@Dragonpone  

 
[Is the odd one out]  
Does….Does that make me the Dragonborn? ….. Or lunch? o_o

@Zeb  
Hmm, you’re right, wouldn’t want you to be left out here.  
I dub thee…Dragonzeb!  
…I never said I was good at naming things. :T

Oopsie, I forgot to mention text only as a tag that could also be used on text pics. I kind of wish all caps didn’t imply ‘text’ though, since not all images with the former are also mostly text, but that’s not as big a concern to me.

@Zeb  
Hold still. You’ll mess up the marinade.
 
Regarding the tags, I think if we had tags for “text at all”, “mostly text”, and “nothing but text”, that would provide the best coverage.
 
@Dragonpone  
I can’t even count the number of times I wanted to find an image, but one of the few things I could remember about it was that it had one or a few words of text on it.

@DragonWraith  
You mean like for images like this?  
 
There are lots of images with a couple words on them, I don’t know how well that would help with searches. And lots of images already tagged with text really try to mean ‘dialogue’ or ‘caption’.
 
Text only works for “nothing but text”, and depending on the amount text and wall of text seem like fine replacements for “lots of text”. The only one that doesn’t seem to exist already is one for “text at all”, but minus the thing you said about searching, it just seems unnecessary to me. There always just seems like there’s a better tag that could be added instead.

@Dragonpone  
Well, considering that searching (and the closely related filtering) is roughly 99% of the point of tags… :P

@DragonWraith  
Uh, lemme word that better.  
I don’t think such a broad tag would help all that well with searching, and I think the tags we have now do a good job covering what we need.

@DragonWraith  
I agree the “text at all”, “Mostly Text” and “Nothing but Text” would be the best solution. Though instead of the tag saying “text at all” we just migrate “text” into that role since that is what it’s being used for anyways and it will keep being used that way (in the last 9 hours since I created this thread, there were at least 12 new images using the current definition of the tag wrong) since it’s current intended use is not intuitive. And then create “Mostly Text” to fill in the role “Text” was supposed to have.
 
Or you can just add “Mostly Text” to take the role of “Text”, and then remove “Text” completely, forcing people to choose “Dialogue” or “Caption” or whatever else there might be.

@Dragonpone  
I think the problem is less about whether we need more or less tags to accomplish better coverage in searches, but correcting the constant misuse of the tag. It just so happens that the easiest solution to it’s constant misuse would be adding and/or removing tags.
 
Sometimes when you have a leaky ship that cannot be patched (I noted above that in the past 9 hours, at least 12 new images have been incorrectly tagged with “text”), you either need to completely overhaul the ship, or abandon it and let it sink to be replaced with another ship. As you’ve noted above, some tags will always be used incorrectly because of confusion with slang. But at least with “Text”, there is no slang to get it confused with, only the sites own definition of the tag which can be easily remedied. No point constantly fighting the current if you don’t have to.

@sgdragon  
Like I said, there’s already tags for “mostly text” and “nothing but text”, though if you guys want the names of ‘text/wall of text’ and ‘text only’ to be changed to make it more recognizable I have no problem with that. The only thing that really needs to be discussed is whether “text at all” should be a thing. This might be an easier thing to discuss, but I need examples of these images that wouldn’t use any of the other tags like ‘dialogue’, or ‘caption’, or underused ones like ‘title’. No one acknowledged the earlier image I brought up so still have no idea if we’re even talking about the same thing.
 
@sgdragon  
I just feel like making a new tag purely because people don’t look at tag descriptions before they tag is bad idea, and would set a bad precedent. I’d argue that having every image with any text on it would cause even more mistaggings, since that’s such a large portion of images with such a gray area. If it’s any text at all, do we count typed signatures? Whether to tag ‘text’ or ‘dialogue’ or both would be even more confusing for some people. The way it’s set up now isn’t perfect, because even if there was a banner for a month at the top of the screen some people just don’t care, but it’s the lesser of two evils.

Remember when RIG would yell at anyone who didn’t tag text on images that were mostly/all text? Good times.
 
Yeah I got nothing to contribute but that, I don’t have Dragon in my name. ;]

@Dragonpone
 
While I agree that images that would just warrant a text tag over a dialogue or caption tag are few and far between, they do exist, like this one (SFW).

@sgdragon  
Ok, I see what you’re talking about then. I don’t think there’s absolutely no upsides to such a tag for stuff like that, but putting aside the fact that using any sort of text tag to search for something like that seems not very useful, it would still carry the problems I said in my last post with not much of a benifit beyond the people already using the tag wrong would now be right, and the people using it correctly will have to adapt to tagging anything with any text. At this point I feel like we’d just be repeating ourselves though, so I’ll leave it to someone else to make a new point for either side or for a mod to make the decision.