All feral-specific topics go in here

Split from forum #190431 - Tagging Policy Discussion: Feral anatomy and tagging genders: (Apr. 2016) and forum #191799 - [Advanced] Tag/Wiki Discussion: Specific articles/tags: Edits/usage, questions, concerns, etc. (Apr. 2016)

forum link: forum #204964 - Feral-specific tag/wiki discussion:[..] (Aug. 2016)

Purpose

Feral-specific:

• tags
• tagging
• policies, usage
• wikis
• questions
• concerns

Topics covered so far

Links

aka

feral anatomy animal anatomy feral questions animal tags feral tags usage

Related Discussions: [incomplete]

forum #213239 - Disambiguation: pouch (Nov. 2016)

forum #208162 - cloaca (Sep. 2016)

forum #206040 - Hyena Species (Aug. 2016)

forum #204948 - Avian Megathread (Aug. 2016)

forum #204937 - Tag Implication: peacock_feather → tail_feathers (Aug. 2016)

forum #199880 - Plant discussion: Tags & Wiki (Jul. 2016)

forum #199251 - Antelope/Gazelle/Deer tagging confusion (Jul. 2016)

forum #195694 - About all these "tail" tags (Jun. 2016)

forum #188816 - Something needs to be DONE about tail_wrap (Mar. 2016)

forum #180728 - New animal_penis and animal_pussy tags, thoughts on deprecating anatomically_correct_* tags, and a tagging project (Jan. 2016)

-
forum #159304 - Sharks, fins, earsharks and what to TAG them with (May 2015)

-
forum #145901 - Ungulates and bovines (Dec. 2014)
forum #131327 - De-alias suggestion: unguligrade --/→ hooves (Jun. 2014)

-
forum #45268 - Species Tags! (Aug. 2012)
forum #28538 - Giraffes are not Equines. (Jan. 2012)

[reserved2]

[reserved3]

[reserved4]

[reserved5]
Disussion: [color=Lime]Open[/color]

#? Some feral-specific tags:

Most of these are really undertagged compared to anthro tags etc.

Some aren't very well-defined,

anatomically_correct_cloaca (??)

animal_genitalia

*cloaca*

• cloaca_juice (..why)
• cloacal_penetration
• note the adjectival form, 'cloacal', 'adjectival' is itself adjectival, which is a nominalized adjective, which is a noun
• presenting_cloaca
• presenting_slit (?)
• spread_cloaca

dorsal_ridge

I'll link/mirror some of the posts from forum #191799 - [Advanced] Tag/Wiki Discussion: Specific articles/tags: Edits/usage, questions, concerns, etc. (Apr. 2016) to here, which should help keep things organized

I'm in favour of the cloacal penetration tag. Its use will come around.
I think cloacal juice tag is unnecessary and presenting slit? I can only see that one being practical if we have a male presenting without the penis sticking out much.

Sorrowless said:
I think cloacal juice tag is unnecessary...

Wouldn't think why as a cloaca may secret fluids and we do have a tag for vaginal fluid secretions as well.

post #854182

--

Oh also, I proposed *_juice -> *_fluids in p.forum #204941

Seems to be well-received so far

--

As for presenting_slit,
it's synonymous with *pussy, *penis, *cloaca etc

maybe presenting_genital_slit instead, but that's a bit long

Isn't the juices from the cloaca just vaginal fluids? aka pussy juice.

Why do we need the horizontal_cloaca tag? It's the default cloaca for reptiles. A vertical cloaca tag makes more sense as it is the exception.

I saw pussy_juice_string & anal_juice etc are all use juice, so I used cloaca_juice instead of cloacal_fluid to tag those posts.

There are also slitfluid & slit_juice tag. I feel slitfluid should have a underscore to make it easier to read.

Sorrowless said:
Isn't the juices from the cloaca just vaginal fluids? aka pussy juice.

Why do we need the horizontal_cloaca tag? It's the default cloaca for reptiles. A vertical cloaca tag makes more sense as it is the exception.

1. Consider ambiguous_gender and male.
2. I will tag both then, and also round cloaca.

Sorrowless said:
Isn't the juices from the cloaca just vaginal fluids? aka pussy juice.

Why do we need the horizontal_cloaca tag? It's the default cloaca for reptiles. A vertical cloaca tag makes more sense as it is the exception.

vaginal_fluids and cloacal_fluids are not necessarily the same thing. cloacal_fluids may arise independent of arousal/involvement of genitalia. And as Sigma pointed out both male or female can have a cloaca.

@ZaSigma4
to be honest im against juice because that kinda implies that these fluids are something you can/should drink, while not deadly, its not really something that is supposed to be swallowed but then again im applying to much to furry OCs...>>

ZaSigma4 said:
I saw pussy_juice_string & anal_juice etc are all use juice, so I used cloaca_juice instead of cloacal_fluid to tag those posts.

There are also slitfluid & slit_juice tag. I feel slitfluid should have a underscore to make it easier to read.

1. Consider ambiguous_gender and male.
2. I will tag both then, and also round cloaca.

1: That makes sense. Perhaps the tag should be used mostly for those cases.
2: I would still recommend not to tag horizontal for reptiles. Saves you the effort and would leave pictures less cluttered. Round cloaca. Are we talking about the avian kind? Think it's unnecessary to tag that for feral birds as well. Leave that one for exceptions so the tag becomes more useful.

@Ruku
I don't care about that, either one is fine for me. I will continue to use juice before you work out a solution. And I want to drink juice in fantasy way if you ask me.

@Sorrowless
Tag them on every posts that can be tagged with will make tagging project easier to do. Don't make me explain how, see zero_pictured and search the forum.

ZaSigma4 said:
@Ruku
I don't care about that, either one is fine for me. I will continue to use juice before you work out a solution. And I want to drink juice in fantasy way if you ask me.

@Sorrowless
Tag them on every posts that can be tagged with will make tagging project easier to do. Don't make me explain how, see zero_pictured and search the forum.

Sorry. I won't. What exactly is it that you want me to search and what about that the zero_pictured tag?

Just because you can tag something doesn't mean we should. Some things should be generalized so you can focus on tagging the exceptions, making it efficient. There is a reason we don't tag every little detail such as skin, arms, legs, heads etc.

Sorrowless said:
Why do we need the horizontal_cloaca tag? It's the default cloaca for reptiles.

Sorrowless said:
Round cloaca. Are we talking about the avian kind? Think it's unnecessary to tag that for feral birds as well.

ok I will tag anatomically_correct_cloaca in these cases, so you can filter that.

ZaSigma4 said:
Tag them on every posts that can be tagged with will make tagging project easier to do.

That's not as important nowadays.
Now that negative set searches work, it's easier to keep track of tagging projects by using private sets: those make it simple to keep track of what's already been checked, and tag search limits are less of a problem too.

ZaSigma4 said:
ok I will tag anatomically_correct_cloaca in these cases, so you can filter that.

That's a good tag. The anatomically correct tags became more redundant once the tags for specific genitals came around, though.

@Genjar
Thank you for info. I hope it is written somewhere obvious.

@Sorrowless
Looks like all your talk was about the usage of anatomically_correct. Seriously, ask @parasprite or maybe @titanmelon & @Genjar instead because I know nothing.

:V

forum #180728 - New animal_penis and animal_pussy tags, thoughts on deprecating anatomically_correct_* tags, and a tagging project (Jan. 2016)

• added to OP

Update/changelog

1. Added forum #208162 - cloaca (Sep. 2016) to the OP + following forums:

• forum #204964 - Feral-specific tag/wiki discussion:[..] (Aug. 2016)
• forum #204948 - Avian Megathread (Aug. 2016)

2. Moved + updated forum links section of all above OPs

ferals with humanoid hair tag

tl;dr: if there're no further suggestions/objections to a feral_head_hair / feral_with_head_hair tag, I'll be tagging cases like post #1017408 with it asap

-
Ok, it's been ~2 months;
Based on what @Chessax mentioned in https://e621.net/forum/show/204890,

are there any preferences/objections about the modified 'ferals with human head hair tags?'

Recent list in alphabetical order:

feral_hair
feral_head_hair
feral_with_hair
feral_with_head_hair
feral_with_humanoid_hair

-------

personal recommendation:

- shorter, but less intuitive than the latter
or,
feral_with_head_hair - most descriptive, but longer by an entire word + 1 extra underscore

-----
post #1017408

titanmelon said:
post #1017408

Looks like a stylized mane, close to what some horse breeds have in real life. Would be weird to tag it as humanoid hair.

Just use hair. Searching for feral hair should be good enough if you want to find feral characters with hair.

Genjar said:
Looks like a stylized mane, close to what some horse breeds have in real life. Would be weird to tag it as humanoid hair.

..what

ok, just substitute any 'generic post of a feral animal with human hair' post of your choice instead then post #973186 post #1023235 post #1020967

---

Delian said:
Just use hair. Searching for feral hair should be good enough if you want to find feral characters with hair.

this was already brought up in the links above;

order:random feral hair isn't consistent (modified based on what @Chessax pointed out)

https://e621.net/forum/show/203258

Not to mention that if there's both a feral and non-feral with hair in the scene, then blacklisting doesn't work selectively

Ok, to rephrase,

Is there either:

• a better tag suggestion for feral_head_hair / feral_with_head_hair

or

• a reason that hasn't already been covered in the above links or here as to why a dedicated tag shouldn't happen

?

If there should be a tag for it, then the best choice would probably be feral_with_hair. Since hair is defined to always be on the head, we don't need to mention head. We also can't use feral_hair because that would imply the hair is of a feral.. type? Hair has no type.

titanmelon said:
order:random feral hair isn't consistent

It's not about whether it's consistent or not, but how consistent it is. I looked at the search and to me it looked pretty consistent. About 10% false positives?
Every time you want to add a tag, you have to take into account the amount of information this tag would bring, that is, how much noise would it remove. And compare that to the complexity it would bring. The amount of work with tagging it. Altho a feature would be easier to find with such a tag, it's important to know exactly how much easier it would be. For example, the search hair feral brings you 10% false positives. But when searching for feral_with_hair, it's likely that 10% of the posts would be missing this tag. In this case, it's much better to have 10% false positives than missing 10% of the posts.
Hmm. This tag also doesn't look like some fetish, which also makes it a lot less valueable for this aspect of the site.

The main reason I'm against adding this tag is however, because it's a failure of the current tagging system. If in the future a character-based tagging system is implemented, then ferals with hair would simply be found by searching for (feral hair). That is, searching for a character on which both tags appear. So if such a system would be added, the search would be 100% consistent and this tag would serve no purpose anymore, a lot of work gone to waste :P

Anyway, if you still want this tag, then a good idea would be to first find out how (in)consistent the feral hair search is.

if there's a disembodied animal_penis in a post, should the penis' 'character' be tagged as feral?

post #1049370

we technically tag disembodied human penises is human [citation needed]

@Delian/All:

populated feral_with_hair, but not by much yet

titanmelon said:
if there's a disembodied animal_penis in a post, should the penis' 'character' be tagged as feral?

post #1049370

we technically tag disembodied human penises is human [citation needed]

because humans only have one kind of penis; human(species) human(form) (alike ~ new york(state) new york(city))

in the case of animal penises we have anthro and feral(+ semi-anthro) but sence we have no body for reference of which its locomotion is the primary basis of differentiating between feral and anthro a disembodied animal penis would not get ether tag. At least thats my assumption could be wrong sence im not aware of any hidden priority in body forms as there is with sexes...

titanmelon said:
we technically tag disembodied human penises is human [citation needed]

Just disembodied_penis + humanoid_penis. Especially if it's not the right color for a human. Nearly all humanoids and many anthros have humanoid dicks, so it can't be assumed that it's a human if there's nothing else visible.

(Citation)

Consider these, for instance:
post #881756 post #831280

There's anthros with clearly humanoid penises. Plus one humanoid disembodied one. Do those belong to humans? Not likely.

From what I remember, ambiguous_form isn't applicable to them either. Because that'd apply to every single disembodied_penis. Which seems unnecessary. And even if we wanted to do that, we'd just implicate it instead of tagging them manually.

vertical_pussy and/or vertical_cloaca?
post #1052479

[replies pending!]

Tag rename idea:
Mirrored from forum #206274 - Should humans get anatomically correct if they have a humanoid penis? (Aug. 2016)

https://e621.net/forum/show/206311

Clawdragons said:
This is slightly off topic, but I feel as though anatomically_correct is actually a rather poor name for what the tag represents.

Is there any reason not to alias it to something more clear, such as species-appropriate_genitalia, or something along those lines?

+1 for some kind of tag rename for this, since it's not so much anatomy that's being tagged, but matching genitalia

sounds like a good starting point IMO

-
matching_species_genitals / matching_species_genitalia

is my alternative

titanmelon said:
Tag rename idea:
Mirrored from forum #206274 - Should humans get anatomically correct if they have a humanoid penis? (Aug. 2016)

Depends, does a human with a canine or horse penis added on for example make them then humanoid instead of human or not, if species does not change based off of genitals then they should get anatomically_correct to differentiate between normal humans and humans with animal parts, we kinda already do that when humans have animal ears, tail or both.

https://e621.net/forum/show/206311
+1 for some kind of tag rename for this, since it's not so much anatomy that's being tagged, but matching genitalia

species-appropriate_genitalia

sounds like a good starting point IMO

-
matching_species_genitals / matching_species_genitalia

is my alternative

Cant say i agree more, ive always made the point that anatomically correct means the entire body featuring the proper traits of the designated species, not just genitalia.

simply proper_genitalia would probably be better then those you listed...

titanmelon said:
vertical_pussy and/or vertical_cloaca?
post #1052479

[replies pending!]

Would likly go for cloaca, that line behind the slit some may say would be a separate anus but most are likly to just see a cloaca here

titanmelon said:
species-appropriate_genitalia sounds like a good starting point IMO

-
matching_species_genitals / matching_species_genitalia

is my alternative

That's exactly what anatomically_correct_penis and anatomically_correct_pussy tags are used for. Are you suggesting that we rename those?

Ruku said:
Depends, does a human with a canine or horse penis added on for example make them then humanoid instead of human or not--

Any non-human bits make them humanoid, doesn't matter what the bits are: animal ears, animal genitalia, pointy ears, etc.

So while you can tag anatomically_correct_penis for humans, it's a giant waste of time. Because they shouldn't have any other penis types if they're correctly tagged.

Genjar said:
That's exactly what anatomically_correct_penis and anatomically_correct_pussy tags are used for. Are you suggesting that we rename those?

Any non-human bits make them humanoid, doesn't matter what the bits are: animal ears, animal genitalia, pointy ears, etc.

So while you can tag anatomically_correct_penis for humans, it's a giant waste of time. Because they shouldn't have any other penis types if they're correctly tagged.

We know what they are used for, the point we are making is that the tags at present used for that propose are misleading and so should be renamed.

And of cource^^ i just seem to remember that not too long ago genitalia alone didnt count for being called humanoid instead of human.