Kiho said:
There are anime where the basic premise is genderswap, where the main male character is transformed into a female, albeit permanently. Should the character osaragi_hazumu be tagged genderswap?
It's been a long time since I've seen that. I had to go back and watch a bit of it again.

I would say yes, though I could go either way on cases like that.

More difficult would be cases like urushibara_ruka. Since he looks the same either way, you can't tell how to tag it unless certain parts are visible. In this case, I'd tag as male/trap unless it's obvious that he's female in the given image.

*Edit
And in Ruka's case, he/she was male or female since birth. That's a bit different than someone's gender changing on them. I'd still tag genderswap due to the perspective of the game/anime, but I could go either way in this case.
So, the discussion died off the moment I moved it to the forums. But I didn't see any opposition.

Just to clarify, we're trying to define the use of the genderswap tag which currently has been left off a large number of canon genderswap cases.

These are the only canon genderswap cases that we have tags for that I can think of at the moment:
tail_red
senou_natsuru
saotome_ranma
tetra_(log_horizon)
yuuki_rito
kibutsuji_muzan
osaragi_hazumu
itsuki_(futaba_channel)
shiina_yuuki
tenko_kuugen (I'd say her female form is her primary form)
urushibara_ruka (male/trap (NOT genderswap) unless evidence is shown in the image) (Surprisingly, I don't think we have any of Ruka that are clearly female)

BTW, I wouldn't think two people switching bodies qualifies for the genderswap tag.

If anyone has any input, please speak up.
I agreed with your stance on the image in question. I hadn't actually thought to apply the tag to canonical switches, which was an excellent point on your part.
It looks like danbooru uses third-party_edit the same way we use photoshop. I think that gets the meaning across better. Is there any reason not to change it?
I think it's better for understandig when we use third-party-edit.
100000% agree.

Dumb question but it would be used for images with extended plain BGs too, right?
I would say yes. Cause not the original artist has done that.
That's what I thought.

I fully support the change and the tag's use then.
I would opt for not changing how we use the tag though... We already worked that out before.

*Edit: Extending a plain BG doesn't modify the art. I don't see the point of using it in cases like that.
Oh, hwhoops. I'll remove it from the one image I uploaded today then.

But I did go ahead and create the tag.
We can bring it up for discussion again if you think we should.

Previously, we decided the tag should be used only in cases where the art itself was modified (not counting cleaning or cropping/rotating the entire image). I think the wiki explains it well enough.

I added the third-party_edit wiki based on the photoshop wiki with a few minor changes/updates.
Thank you bunches!
Friendly reminder to everyone that you don't need to add the cropped tag to images that have letter boxing or superfluous tat like scans.

I'm currently working on removing the tag from as many relevant images as possible.
tags “catboy” “catgirl” “doggirl” “wolfgirl” “foxgirl”and “bunnygirl” should be aliases to “cat_ears” “dog_ears” “wolf_ears” “fox_ears” and “bunny_ears” imo

And I also feel like “multicolored_hair” should be a tag. What do you guys think about all this?
You brought this up 5 years ago as well, though Kiho and vf voted against it and that ended the discussion.

We should really fill out the wikis for all of those. But are you proposing this having read the wikis for catgirl, bunnygirl and foxgirl?

---
We have a minimum of 39 posts that very clearly contain catgirls, but no cat ears. Most of these can be found in catgirl -animal_ears. Reversing the alias would mean we'd have to un-tag these. Do you really think it's worth that just to tag the few posts we have that contain males with cat ears and yet do not contain catgirls?

I think it's fine the way it is.

---
Same for foxgirls. At minimum, 31 posts that very clearly contain foxgirls but couldn't be tagged fox_ears. See: foxgirl -animal_ears

---
bunnygirl and bunny_ears are both valid tags. Aliasing one to another equates to removing a tag. Honestly, I wouldn't mind losing the bunny_ears tag since most of those "should" be tagged either bunnygirl, rabbit or bunny anyway. Not to mention this is the only specific animal ears tag we have that isn't aliased to something else. But I really don't see any great reason to get rid of it either.
Yeah I'm against it too.

As for multicolored hair we don't super duper need that either.
Ok I understand. I just thought it was real tacky how there are posts with “bunnygirl” that don’t have “bunny_ears”, or better yet “bunnygirl” and “bunny_ears” in like the same post. I thought it would make things cleaner. But I see. Better search “bunnygirl” instead of “bunny_ears” “tail”.

But that’s just my opinion. But idc either way Kona is still Kona in my eyes
1. I need to go and correct any images with rabbit ears clearly visible but not tagged. That's called a mistake, not a rule of thumb.

2. bunnygirl applies, and has always applied, to both Playboy-styled girls in costumes AND girls like Viera from FF.
IDK if this has been a tag and has been removed or what, but I think "sundress" is a common enough image theme to be a tag and is a tag in other -booru, unless it's called something else here and I'm missing it.
We use the tag summer_dress already.
Thanks, Yume. I just couldn't think of what else to call it.
is mono_lith DMCA?
mattiasc02 said:
is mono_lith DMCA?
Uhm... If we used to have their art on here, and then someone higher up came and deleted them all for that reason, then I'm going to assume they're a no-go now, yes.
Petition to create a Mini-Min tag for the miniature Megumin in post #312346.
Mr.peanutbutter said:
Petition to create a Mini-Min tag for the miniature Megumin in post #312346.
Well, no. But secondly, are we sure that isn't a different character?

Edit: That's not Megumin.

Also, I've been thinking about changing the shikieiki_yamaxanadu tag since I only recently discovered "Yamaxanadu" is her title, and not part of her given name. Aaaaany objections?
Nope.

Btw, about the mini-min thing, I don’t care what her name is. I’ll still call her mini-min just for the meme.
(I’ll use the correct tag when uploading or editing, of course.)
So, what should we do about this?

Normally we would just untag them and tell the member to stop. Though there's also the option of adding a "striped_swimsuit" tag or changing the description for striped_panties and removing the implication.
I feel like striped panties should stay as striped panties. We either tell them to stop or perhaps he can help us create a "striped_clothing" tag? (I think tagging "bikinis" as "striped panties" is... so stupid so that's why lol)
I would prefer if all those changes were undone, and that was explained to the user.

They also shouldn't tag summer for images with a plain, white BG.

Edit: At the VERY least they should've asked first. This could qualify as some kind of...tag spamming.

Edit 2: Actually, no they ain't. I was thinking of the actual cut of women's panties called "bikini". So, yeah, undo it all. Because it's a bikini top and a bikini bottom. And none of it is "underwear". And I don't like the idea of removing the connotation, tags wise, that actual panties are underwear.