About tags: flower_request and weapon_request

tagme is already a nonsensical word, so I disagree that parenthesis improve anything here.

Alignn said:
tagme is already a nonsensical word, so I disagree that parenthesis improve anything here.

Maybe we can simply have the names without parenthesis, use them and understand them normally. It's no big deal anyway. Both versions are easy to understand.

But what I said is still true:

The lack of space in "tagme" does not make it nonsensical.

The parenthesis would make the new tag names more comfortable because it would make "syntactic" sense, i.e. the order of words would make immediate sense: tagme (food) would naturally be a request ("tag me!") followed by a context.

What about with colons?

Example:

tagme:food

Lunatic6 said:
What about with colons?

Example:

tagme:food

I'm good with that.

It reminds me that we have howto:, tag_group: and pool_group:, with colons, too.

Yeah, that sounds good.
I completely forgot we can have punctuation in tags...

I guess it's fine, but using meta-operators as labels feels sort of wrong to me from an analytical standpoint. It's also caused issues in the past (Blood+ was broken for many purposes after we forced it so that we could use that styling as '+' was a functional meta-operator).

For that reason I would probably lean against it.

We have plenty of tags with colons... :d is the most popular (i.e. the one with most posts)

See also:

http://danbooru.donmai.us/tag?commit=Search&name=*%3A*&type=&order=count

We do, and that's why it's fine. It's just that tags that mimic operators are the ones that will cause problems if and when bugs appear.

*bumps*

Right. I used tagme:hair for only one post, at the moment.

Regardless of the tag name (tagme (hair), hair_request [?], etc.), this tag really needs a wiki to point to the lists of hair tags. So I created one.

Feel free to revise the tag name, the wiki and whatnot.

Danielx21 said:
I created a tag without asking anyone
I force my naming convention on everyone else
I created a wiki so you cannot delete or rename it

Nicely done.

1. I'm for Log's tagme_x suggestion. Since it is already used on 3db, I see no reason to create another standard for this site only.

2. People who don't tag hair color are awful and I wish I could give them a a negative record for it. And if they ever use this tag instead of tagging hair color, I'll finally have a valid reason to give them a record, namely: "tagme: Not to be used as an excuse for laziness; tag your uploads as best you can.".

We need to specify a SMALL number of tagme_ tags that can be used. I don't want users to upload a post with only these 8 tags:

artist_request
character_request
copyright_request
source_request
tagme
tagme_hair
tagme_eyes
tagme_clothes

No. And, in general, please stop (verbally) attacking me. Apparently, when you disagree with something I do, I'm often a vandal who doesn't care about the opinions of other people. That's annoying.

I can't and didn't "force my naming convention on everyone else". The proof is that someone was able to untag the post after giving it a hair tag. (though I'd prefer that many other hair tags were added to it eventually) I even made changes easier by tagging only one post and explaining what I did. Note that my first choice, of the first message, would be the format of weapon_request, before this conversation took place.

A tag request for hair (whatever the name) (and whatever the scope, as it could easily be a request for "tagme:appearance" and whatnot) is a great idea because we have relatively many hair tags, often obscure. Linking the wiki to tag group:hair, tag group:hair styles and even tag group:hair color is necessary because people have to know what are our hair color tags, including a few less intuitive ones like two-tone_hair, even if they should always tag hair colors not to be called "lazy". (the wiki should reflect that, too)

(FWIW, I copied the message "Not to be used as an excuse for laziness; tag your uploads as best you can" from tagme. It was written there in 2008.)

I and other people create a lot of wikis, a lot of tags. Everyday the tag list becomes full of additions nobody else asked for. Everyday new wikis (often reasonable and useful ones) are created without discussions, and regularly discussions are created to revise old wikis/tags.

Creating undiscussed tags and wikis is not bad. But we are not talking about "undiscussed" tags and wikis, since we have this thread, that I created.

S1eth said:
We need to specify a SMALL number of tagme_ tags that can be used. I don't want users to upload a post with only these 8 tags:

artist_request
character_request
copyright_request
source_request
tagme
tagme_hair
tagme_eyes
tagme_clothes

I agree with this. Which is why I was not a fan of the whole idea to begin with. We already have people that constantly tag with character/artist/source requests and tagmes without trying to find stuff out. I could only imagine what it's going to be like with 30 other tagme requests available.

imho, the extensive documentation/level of depth of tagme_too_common_&_general_tags (and wikis to boot) is a bit excessive to even include the very basic like eyes, hair, clothes, etc.

didn't we have lists of * and tag groups to address all of these? tagme_too_common_&_general_tags defeat the purpose of the help pages and compilation of tags.

So,do we use tagme_(thing)
Or x_request?
Or some other alternative?

There are many,many posts that need the flora identified,and going on a mass-tagging spree before confirming this just seems like a bad idea

Oh,and as for the issue about people using tagme to not tag anything,would looking at the tag history identify them?

I've begun to use tagme_(flower),
Such as in post #1099375

Will add in the flower names when they are identified

Edit:It seems to have been changed to flower_request

I think just using fruit request is more intuitive than tagme_x, because most people wouldn't think of searching it that way, and because it makes it more clear that what the tagger wants is a specific name, as opposed to just more detail, as hair, eye, and clothing tags are wont to do.

S1eth said:
In my opinion, we should aim for keeping tagme as close to empty as possible.

*this is a delayed reaction, so my response might be a little disconnected to the more recent replies above. *

anyways, i noticed that while some of us try to empty tagme, some are actually increasing it in large quantities. adding nothing at all (most of the time) but tagme. i'm not so sure if this is even worthy of community's attention because it seem harmless anyway. but what if there are more variants of tagme? a post could be filled with gentags full of tagmes if abused?! how should we deal with it?

i still think it's better to update the wikis, lists, tag groups, etc to help the uploader identify the object himself. if that's impossible maybe leaving a descriptive comment might be more helpful. it's very likely a helpful member will help identify it even before/without asking...

Isn't the main idea behind danbooru to have a well-organized database of quality (anime) art?
So shouldn't we have similarly strict requirements on tagging as we do image quality?

I would say no, upload contribution and tagging contribution are different and should be treated differently. Danbooru works by volunteer contribution in people's free time and they shouldn't be discouraged from tagging "if they're not going to put in as much effort as I would". Whilst enthusiasm for efforts like uploading images should be dampened because filtering uploads taxes the mods, efforts like tagging, even in small amounts, don't make more work for the mods and is only a benefit to everyone.

The frustration with poorly tagged uploads is not that you didn't want to find the upload in your search (which is true of poor quality images and is why we delete them) but that you would've wanted the upload to appear in other searches you made, and it's annoying to know that other poorly tagged uploads won't appear in your searches when you're try to find them (over- and incorrectly tagged uploads are a different issue).

However, a high-quality, under-tagged upload may be hard to find, but would be impossible to find had it not been uploaded at all. It's likely that the uploader wouldn't have bothered if there was a "don't upload if you won't tag it fully", so it's better that the uploader have tagged it poorly than not uploaded it at all. Then there's at least some chance that someone else will find it and tag it and if another uploader wants to upload the same image, they'll find the image on iqdb first and hopefully they'll tag the old one better rather than upload the new one or give up entirely.

Special tags like characters, copyright, artist, spoilers, and rating, which have stricter rules, are an exception to this. Like poor quality uploads, people don't want spoiler or guro uploads to appear in their searches and character, copyright & artist tags make the site minimally search-able, so the "don't upload if you won't tag these" rule extents this far but no further. Any effort more than this shouldn't be discouraged just because the tagger hasn't done as good a job as you would.

Edit: Though it is a little frustrating when people go on an upload spree, then tag everything the next day. If I tag one of these images, I get the feeling that my effort is wasted because the uploader would've tagged it themselves and are not likely to go find another image to tag, hence why when I go on tagging-sprees, I start from the oldest post first.

Well as for I know, tagging means providing some information that can support the image, also making it more easier to find, but still there are some limitation when tagging an image.

For example, the mosaic_art tag, we cannot always apply the "tag what you see" rule here since we do not want that post to appear in every tag search which is available in the post.