Posted under Tags
no_people still has the same fundamental issue that no_humans does. Optimus Prime isn't people; Lopunny isn't people; an orc isn't people - all of these opinions are far from uncommon. Users already tag no_humans without hesitation because they assume it's obvious; the same would be true of no_people. We'd get a new name, and nothing would change.
Please don't tell me you're implying post #8830124 should be 1boy and not mecha focus.
But yes this is a fundamental disagreement on the nature how things should be classified not an issue with the tag name itself.
Ultexia said:
I think no_humans is meant to convey the absence of definite foreground characters. People is for people in the background that you may have trouble spotting without looking for them so maybe it's not really mistagged in these cases.
That makes no sense to me, tagging no humans when there are humans in the image.
zetsubousensei said:
Please don't tell me you're implying post #8830124 should be 1boy and not mecha focus.
But yes this is a fundamental disagreement on the nature how things should be classified not an issue with the tag name itself.
I mean, I think it should be (tagged as 1boy, I mean, not removing mecha focus). Transformers are sentient humanoid robots, not mechas that are piloted by people.
Updated by Confetto
zetsubousensei said:
Please don't tell me you're implying post #8830124 should be 1boy and not mecha focus.
But yes this is a fundamental disagreement on the nature how things should be classified not an issue with the tag name itself.
I never said anything about mecha_focus; please don't put words in my mouth. Obviously that post qualifies. But as far as I'm aware, sentient, non-piloted mecha should be tagged with gender tags, something that's already been happening for a long time now. If anyone has issues with this, then that's a topic for a seperate thread so as to avoid derailing this one.
The bulk update request #38452 (forum #341074) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
I think the wiki needs to be rewritten to explicitly state which cases it should and shouldn't be used, with picture examples, look at off-shoulder_dress as an example. Even I'm confused because in this thread it's mentioned that humanoid robot posts like transformers keep apparently getting mistagged no humans but the wiki doesn't even mention not to use it with that tag, only androids as far as robots go.
BUR #41424 has been rejected.
create alias no_humans -> no_humanoids
Nth times the charm?
This really seems to be the best option and has been attempted by multiple people multiple times over multiple years. No people just sounds odd and might run into the same issue of "oh that's gardivor, not a person". "Non humanoid only" would exclude scenery and object focus.
The only alternative is (see next bur)
Edit: All the previous times this exact rename has been attempted. All by 3 different people and now a fourth person with me.
BUR #38452 +17 / -9
BUR #31947 +14 / -1
BUR #3001 +4 / -2
Updated by Zalza
BUR #41425 has been rejected.
create alias no_humans -> no_humanoids
remove alias no_humans -> no_humanoids
create implication no_humanoids -> no_humans
mass update -> (furry_female or furry_male) solo chartags:1 copytags:1 -disembodied_* -faceless* -cosplay -fake* rating:g -*skin (standing or running) (sonic_(series) or pokemon_(creature) or animal_crossing) -> no_humans
mass update favgroup:43690 -> no_humans
.... If people want this to be more granular. So no humans for anything not a person (eg, pokemon regardless of wether it's eevee or gardivor) while no humanoids is for what this thread describes.
Alias and unalias is there to move the wiki.
Edit: Favgroups can only have 10k posts each, the bur has been updated with a mass update search. The reason it is gendered furry instead of just furry is to filter out people tagging non humanoid animals/pokemon/etc with furry, when rated g that should only catch actual anthros. An extra safety precaution was initially just pulling from the "big" furry copyrights in the search and leave more complicated things to the favgroups.
Updated by Zalza
If you do that then no humans isn't going to be populated when the alias is removed and then trying to imply it will fail because then no humanoids is going to have the same number of posts as no humans (they would be equivalent searches). Create a favgroup and mass update it instead.
WRS said:
If you do that then no humans isn't going to be populated when the alias is removed and then trying to imply it will fail because then no humanoids is going to have the same number of posts as no humans (they would be equivalent searches). Create a favgroup and mass update it instead.
@wrs I should probs have mentioned that this would include adding that tag to posts. I'll add a starting fav group real quick.
Updated by Zalza
You "probably" should have done that before you pitched the BUR. If the edited-in ping was to notify me that you hadn't finished the other half, my vote still won't change because I specifically voted against your unedited BUR that moved no humans then tried to imply a tag that would be a functionally equivalent search. Now I have a second reason to maintain the downvote and that's because you edited a BUR that already had votes on it.
Make sure to do the work prior to requesting a BUR so you don't invalidate opinions due to posting a half-finished request.
The bulk update request #41425 (forum #357035) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.
Well atleast now I can delete the quadrillion fav groups I made trying to organize this. Next time I will have them ready before the bur, sorry about that @wrs and @nonamethanks
The bulk update request #39891 (forum #346792) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
The bulk update request #41424 (forum #357034) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
