savageorange said:
Just noticed undertagging of talking_feral, which I split into 3 searches:

• (solo partition) -talking_feral feral -duo -group -zero_pictured ~dialogue ~voice_acted (~13.4k posts). A few of these posts have an offscreen, ambiguous character so don't warrant the talking_feral tag, but most do warrant it.
• (duo partition) -talking_feral feral -solo -group -zero_pictured -human -humanoid -taur -anthro ~dialogue ~voice_acted (17.6k posts)
• (group partition) -talking_feral feral -solo -duo -zero_pictured -human -humanoid -taur -anthro ~dialogue ~voice_acted (10.1k posts)

I think this is a great tag to further populate. Additionally, anthro_focus. There are many images in which the anthro is the focus, while the feral is a very small part of the image, examples are often found at:

-anthro_focus feral anthro sky bird
-anthro_focus feral anthro crab

I think for both anthro_focus and talking_feral, they have great use for those wishing to blacklist feral, but who might not wish to blacklist characters that are sentient, or those that are a small part of the image, even taking up just a couple brushstrokes in the case of birds in the sky.

I’ve been looking through lots of sketches and model sheets lately to get a better understanding of how anthro designs are constructed. While on the hunt, I started to notice a woeful lack of the guide_lines tag. Such lines are incredibly helpful for a beginner artist who doesn’t understand construction… like me!

So, I’ll probably be waltzing through
-status:pending sketch -guide_lines off and on over the next few weeks to see if any of these do, in fact, need the guide_lines tag.

Noticing a gigantic amount of nipples -areola. Nipples on anthro or humanoid characters almost always have an areola.

Hi there!
I'm cleaning up "riding rating:e" again, but I'm a bit doubtful on a bunch of posts.

According to the wiki, riding is to be applied only when a character is sitting on the back of a non-anthro, and in a non-sexual context. This would mean that any image with an anthro horse/taur/etc. technically should have its tag removed, even though it sometimes makes sense (to me) to tag it with riding regardless.

I'm talking about posts like:
#4366070
#3136103
for example

Also, how about sex while riding? e.g. #4434506
It's technically not non-sexual, but it'd make no sense to remove the tag (again, at least to me)

Do I always follow the wiki, or use my own judgement in cases like these?
Just wanted to ask before I accidentally vandalize hundreds of posts :P

-H

aiex22 said:
Do I always follow the wiki, or use my own judgement in cases like these?
Just wanted to ask before I accidentally vandalize hundreds of posts :P

I'd say follow the wiki. The intent seems to be for the tag to be separate from penile_penetrating and cowgirl_position, which a lot of people seem to confuse it for and makes it an otherwise pointless tag (there's also riding_cock, riding_dildo, and riding_sex_toy, which should be aliased to the appropriate penetration tags). post #4434506 has riding alongside penetration; the riding itself is non-sexual (they're riding on a horse, not having sex with it), the image as a whole doesn't need to be non-sexual.

watsit said:
I'd say follow the wiki. The intent seems to be for...
...to be non-sexual

Awesome, thanks!

The tag reverse_rape needs to have someone go thru it and tag them correctly to bring them into the common use tags of female_rape male_raped etc. Rape tag also needs to be gone thru and have the untagged sex tagged as sex, as a lot of the rape tag without the sex tag either isn't tagged right or it's used as imminent_rape or post_rape.

generic_ferret said:
The tag reverse_rape needs to have someone go thru it and tag them correctly to bring them into the common use tags of female_rape male_raped etc. Rape tag also needs to be gone thru and have the untagged sex tagged as sex, as a lot of the rape tag without the sex tag either isn't tagged right or it's used as imminent_rape or post_rape.

imo all the x_rape tags should probably be aliased to x_rapist or x_raping to make them more clear.

pleaseletmein said:
imo all the x_rape tags should probably be aliased to x_rapist or x_raping to make them more clear.

That would be a lot clearer. And a hell of a lot clearer than "reverse rape".

Also previous folk have mentioned the exposed_breasts tags and covered_breasts being untagged. Someone also needs to go thru the clothed_breasts tag and probably change it to whichever of the covered_breasts or clothed_breasts tag has more. I think the covered_breasts tag? It would also work for breasts that are covered by non-clothing, like uhhh idk a Statue of David leaf???

“female_focus male/male” posts feature mostly male/male photos with mistagged female inclusion

Just to post a note here that I have updated the OP here with more tagging projects here, with links to TagMe for ease of use: topic #42093

I don't if this is the right place to bring this up, but I feel like sheathed_humanoid_penis should not implicate hybrid_penis since not all of the penises themselves have more than one trait.

sins_and_virtues said:
I don't if this is the right place to bring this up, but I feel like sheathed_humanoid_penis should not implicate hybrid_penis since not all of the penises themselves have more than one trait.

I'm not sure what you could mean by this, do you have example? because, to me, humanoid_penis and sheath are both necessarily traits of different animal's genitalia.

sipothac said:
I'm not sure what you could mean by this, do you have example? because, to me, humanoid_penis and sheath are both necessarily traits of different animal's genitalia.

A sheath isn't a penis, so a sheathed humanoid penis isn't necessarily a hybrid of multiple types of penises; it's a normal (non-hybrid) humanoid penis, coming out of a sheath (like a normal non-hybrid humanoid penis, coming out of a genital_slit). It could be hybrid_genitalia or mismatched_genitalia, but not a hybrid_penis.

watsit said:
A sheath isn't a penis, so a sheathed humanoid penis isn't necessarily a hybrid of multiple types of penises; it's a normal (non-hybrid) humanoid penis, coming out of a sheath (like a normal non-hybrid humanoid penis, coming out of a genital_slit). It could be hybrid_genitalia or mismatched_genitalia, but not a hybrid_penis.

Yes that's a good way of putting it, thanks!

Not sure if this has come up yet (I used the forum search feature and didn't see any hits), but I've noticed there are four (or maybe more) separate tags for what amounts to submissive or receiving POV. There's "taker_pov," "submissive_pov," "receiving_pov," and "penetrated_pov." While they could conceivably be argued to have unique implications, I think other tags can take care of that. As it is now, images with this concept are split under these tags, so searching for content of that nature takes several separate searches to see everything the site has to offer.

What do people think about which tag should rule them all, and in the darkness bind them?

shoo-wop said:
Not sure if this has come up yet (I used the forum search feature and didn't see any hits), but I've noticed there are four (or maybe more) separate tags for what amounts to submissive or receiving POV. There's "taker_pov," "submissive_pov," "receiving_pov," and "penetrated_pov." While they could conceivably be argued to have unique implications, I think other tags can take care of that. As it is now, images with this concept are split under these tags, so searching for content of that nature takes several separate searches to see everything the site has to offer.

What do people think about which tag should rule them all, and in the darkness bind them?

submissive =/= penetrated, but the other two could probably be aliased to penetrated_pov.

I just discovered that the age tag is, at the time of posting this, not considered invalid or anything, and about half of its posts consist of young content. Personality I would use age for an age number(s) being displayed and/or said out loud.

sins_and_virtues said:
I just discovered that the age tag is, at the time of posting this, not considered invalid or anything, and about half of its posts consist of young content. Personality I would use age for an age number(s) being displayed and/or said out loud.

that's what stated_age is normally used for.

sins_and_virtues said:
I just discovered that the age tag is, at the time of posting this, not considered invalid or anything,

topic #39202

Just discovered what a mess the barefoot tag is. It's not supposed to be tagged on fully nude characters or ferals, since barefoot-ness is the norm for them, but there are MANY MANY pages of this. Theoretically barefoot should imply clothed, but it can't right now because it would screw up thousands of mistagged images.

barefoot nude -clothed should be empty. So should barefoot -clothed, but some of those are just missing the clothed tag.
barefoot feral -anthro -human -humanoid should also be empty.
barefoot nude may contain some mistagged images as well.
I've made a tagme.dev project for barefoot nude -clothed here: https://tagme.dev/projects/barefootcleanup

cloudpie said:
Just discovered what a mess the barefoot tag is. It's not supposed to be tagged on fully nude characters or ferals, since barefoot-ness is the norm for them, but there are MANY MANY pages of this. Theoretically barefoot should imply clothed, but it can't right now because it would screw up thousands of mistagged images.

barefoot nude -clothed should be empty. So should barefoot -clothed, but some of those are just missing the clothed tag.
barefoot feral -anthro -human -humanoid should also be empty.
barefoot nude may contain some mistagged images as well.
I've made a tagme.dev project for barefoot nude -clothed here: https://tagme.dev/projects/barefootcleanup

This definition was only changed in 2023, and for 12 years before that the wiki only read "Images or animations where a character is not wearing any footwear." Of course there's going to be plenty of "misuse" of the tag when something suddenly gets changed like that.

I honestly think the requirement of being clothed is a little stupid. "Barefoot" just means wearing nothing on your feet, and tags should match their actual definition - not some arbitrary set of requirements we made up for it.

faucet said:
This definition was only changed in 2023, and for 12 years before that the wiki only read "Images or animations where a character is not wearing any footwear." Of course there's going to be plenty of "misuse" of the tag when something suddenly gets changed like that.

I honestly think the requirement of being clothed is a little stupid. "Barefoot" just means wearing nothing on your feet, and tags should match their actual definition - not some arbitrary set of requirements we made up for it.

honestly, applying barefoot to nude characters is like applying bottomless or topless to nude characters. if a character is nude than their feet are already bare, necessarily.

faucet said:
This definition was only changed in 2023

Because it was getting applied to ferals and fully nude characters, and basically ending up as a duplicate of feet (which can apply to fully nude characters and ferals).

faucet said:
I honestly think the requirement of being clothed is a little stupid. "Barefoot" just means wearing nothing on your feet, and tags should match their actual definition - not some arbitrary set of requirements we made up for it.

You can say the same for topless, bottomless, exposed_breasts, nude, etc. "Topless" just means not wearing anything on your top, and "bottomless" just means not wearing anything on your bottom, exposed_breasts just means breasts not being covered, and nude just means a character not wearing any clothes. But we arbitrarily require that topless/bottomless means wearing something elsewhere, exposed_breasts is only for breasts that should be covered but have been uncovered by something (e.g. a shirt that's been lifted or torn open), and nude is only for characters that are expected to wear clothes (e.g. not ferals, and we use tags like clothed_feral for characters that aren't expected to wear clothes but are).

A quadruped standing on all fours shouldn't be tagged all_fours despite technically doing so, and a biped standing on their two legs shouldn't be tagged on_hind_legs either, because that's the expected state for such characters.

The various x_focus also only means there's a focus on x, but we arbitrarily require some non-x element in the picture. solo_focus requires two or more characters visible, male_focus requires a non-male character, anthro_focus requires a non-anthro character, etc.

Forced_partners + rape -> rape_by_proxy
Tag implication(?)

I was noticing a lot of these posts could be valid to include the implicated tag.

thatsmyfettish said:
Forced_partners + rape -> rape_by_proxy
Tag implication(?)

I was noticing a lot of these posts could be valid to include the implicated tag.

You can't make a combination of tags imply a tag, and the rape tag may not be applicable to whatever was tagged with forced_partners, making it not rape_by_proxy

You can suggest the flipped tag implications in a BUR

crossdressing female solo -comic -sequence -multiple_images -model_sheet

Often mistagged according to TWYS. Also not enough actual female crossdressing posts in there :(

Update: Pretty much cleaned up, for now.

nimphia said:
crossdressing female solo -comic -sequence -multiple_images -model_sheet

Often mistagged according to TWYS. Also not enough actual female crossdressing posts in there :(

Update: Pretty much cleaned up, for now.

... is it really crossdressing for a female to wear shorts or pants? That still seems to be quite mistagged.

watsit said:
... is it really crossdressing for a female to wear shorts or pants? That still seems to be quite mistagged.

Most of them are wearing men's underwear or swimwear, or are wearing traditionally masculine-associated clothing like suits. I was just going through to clean up the lore males rather than looking at everything in the tag with a fine-tooth comb. I wouldn't consider most women wearing shorts or pants to be crossdressing, but these I would:

post #3060284 post #4229155 post #4114285

Doesn't feel right to scrutinize what counts as female crossdressing more than we would male crossdressing, personally, but that's just me. But there are some I'm not sure on, like:

post #3227809 post #1116683

Personally I feel like these two seem masculine enough to me to qualify. I didn't add the tag to them, but I also didn't see any reason to remove it.

Female crossdressing is uncommon, but it does exist, drag kings exist and ouji_(fashion) very frequently involves it.

watsit said:
... is it really crossdressing for a female to wear shorts or pants? That still seems to be quite mistagged.

going casually topless with shorts is definitely part of traditionally male fashion, so that's 100% crossdressing.

the second one is a bit more on the edge, but I think it passes.

dba_afish said:
going casually topless with shorts is definitely part of traditionally male fashion, so that's 100% crossdressing.

the second one is a bit more on the edge, but I think it passes.

I didn't even see those were links to specific posts omg I thought they were wiki links. But yeah, I'd agree with you. First is wearing men's swimwear, second is borderline but personally I think it definitely looks like the character is going for a masculine appearance. Honestly I would have tagged that character male were it not for the slight breast curve.

dba_afish said:
going casually topless with shorts is definitely part of traditionally male fashion, so that's 100% crossdressing.

I think it's not that great of an idea to base crossdressing on what a character isn't wearing, instead of purely what they are wearing. Like, imagine a female is wearing a short-sleeve shirt and shorts, she takes off the shirt at the end of one page in a sequence, so the next page she's topless with shorts, which then also get removed at some point. Having a character go from dressed normally to crossdressing just for taking off their shirt doesn't seem right.

dba_afish said:
the second one is a bit more on the edge, but I think it passes.

I feel that plays too much into the trope that "women don't wear pants". Or that when they do, they're special form-fitting pants that don't bother with flourishes like "pockets" because they get in the way of showing off her ass and thighs. That it's "men's clothing" if it's not accentuating their breasts, ass, hips, or thighs.

nimphia said:
second is borderline but personally I think it definitely looks like the character is going for a masculine appearance. Honestly I would have tagged that character male were it not for the slight breast curve.

I get more of a 90s punkish vibe, personally. A more androgynous look that's neither too masculine or feminine.

watsit said:
I get more of a 90s punkish vibe, personally. A more androgynous look that's neither too masculine or feminine.

I get that too, I think. I don't mind removing the tag on that one (I wasn't the one to add it anyways).

Also, yeah, the reason the first one is crossdressing isn't because she's topless, it's because she's wearing traditionally men's swimwear. Dunno why the toplessness was the thing to be pointed out.

It'd probably be best to just leave crossdressing to apply specifically for things like that - men's underwear, men's swimwear, tuxedos and other traditionally men's suits, etc, as well as the aforementioned drag kings and ouji/boystyle wearers, and then leave the other stuff for just tomboy. After all, we don't tag feminine male characters in form-fitting short shorts as crossdressing. In the post I made above, I'd still tag the first three as crossdressing, but the last two are fine with just tomboy, I think.

nimphia said:
Also, yeah, the reason the first one is crossdressing isn't because she's topless, it's because she's wearing traditionally men's swimwear. Dunno why the toplessness was the thing to be pointed out.

those aren't swimming_trunks, though, they're cargo_shorts. swim trunks wouldn't have a button and belt loops.

we should be taking the entire outfit into account and a lack of a shirt is a part of the outfit that character is wearing when tagging fashion-type stuff, crossdressing included.

dba_afish said:
those aren't swimming_trunks, though, they're cargo_shorts. swim trunks wouldn't have a button and belt loops.

we should be taking the entire outfit into account and a lack of a shirt is a part of the outfit that character is wearing when tagging fashion-type stuff, crossdressing included.

My eyes are just not working today, damn. Shrug. I dunno. Maybe we need a separate thread for this, since it's getting off-topic.

I feel like money_rain is way too undertagged. I don't know how many posts actually feature a money rain, but there should at least be more under this tag since it feels so appropriate.

Clean up after the aliasing of girly to femboy; remove the "femboy" tag from female/ambiguous posts (aswell as adding male-bodied tags if missing)
remove solo if you're feeling like you can go through a fuckloads of posts.
femboy -male -maleherm -andromorph solo

Remember that female bodied (curvesss) characters with flat chests and no apparent pussy count as female according to TWYS (4.B.iv)

We may return to this if "girly" gets reinstated as a tag with a different definition that may include female/ambiguous or we get something like "feminine", although we'd then need to do something about the current gender tagging - having "feminine_ambiguous" would fall under "female" etc.

The ~anthro ~feral not_furry could be expanded to ~anthro ~feral ~animal_humanoid not_furry. animal_humanoid are also always by definition 'furry', so either that tag's wrong or not_furry is.

lily_(flower) ~water_lily ~lily_pad ~calla_lily ~rain_lily ~spider_lily ~impala_lily ~daylily_(flower) ~lily_of_the_valley - Should mostly be clean barring images with both right now but for future reference, these flowers aren't true lilies and thus shouldn't be tagged as lily_(flower)

gusta_cz said:
Clean up after the aliasing of girly to femboy; remove the "femboy" tag from female/ambiguous posts (aswell as adding male-bodied tags if missing)
remove solo if you're feeling like you can go through a fuckloads of posts.
femboy -male -maleherm -andromorph solo

Remember that female bodied (curvesss) characters with flat chests and no apparent pussy count as female according to TWYS (4.B.iv)

We may return to this if "girly" gets reinstated as a tag with a different definition that may include female/ambiguous or we get something like "feminine", although we'd then need to do something about the current gender tagging - having "feminine_ambiguous" would fall under "female" etc.

Damn, it took you guys this long to changed it?

Going through older art on a custom search and started noticing a lot of art that's clearly a snow_leopard tagged both leopard and snow_leopard. Not sure if a batch removal of the leopard tag from "snow_leopard solo" that's not also tagged hybrid would be a good idea or not. Though it would probably end up with less mistagged than the current results.

animate_inanimate inanimate_object - inanimate_object is for non-living objects resembling characters

pubic_mound -rating:e: Actual visible pubic mounds are explicit, but there's a ton of mistagging that's just fupa, camel_toe, featureless_crotch, etc.

Edit - I changed the rating of a good handful of the more blatant ones, but there's just... so much mistagging and I'm not confident in my ability to sort it all out...

kevsnowcat said:
Going through older art on a custom search and started noticing a lot of art that's clearly a snow_leopard tagged both leopard and snow_leopard. Not sure if a batch removal of the leopard tag from "snow_leopard solo" that's not also tagged hybrid would be a good idea or not. Though it would probably end up with less mistagged than the current results.

Worse than I thought at first, there's an absolutely massive amount of pics mistagged leopard and snow_leopard. I can only think people were using snow leopard without the underscore, then went back in to change it and didn't remove leopard. Or it was somehow aliased back in the early days. I can't think of any easy way to fix it.

Made two new TagMe projects for tagging young characters' genders, forms and age groups. Unlike the old one this uses the young tag and not the cub apocalypse set. They also have built in options to remove young and add lore tags.

https://tagme.dev/projects/young_types/
https://tagme.dev/projects/young_ages/

Safe only:
https://tagme.dev/projects/young_types_safe
https://tagme.dev/projects/young_ages_safe

Is it just me, or is the 'headgear <> headwear' implication (and related tags) backwards?
Shouldn't it be headgear -> headwear and not the other way around? Or, going off the wikis, no implication at all?

dirtyderg said:
Is it just me, or is the 'headgear <> headwear' implication (and related tags) backwards?
Shouldn't it be headgear -> headwear and not the other way around? Or, going off the wikis, no implication at all?

The direction is correct. Headgear is for things you equip on your head, but it does not have to count as clothing if not worn. Headwear is always clothing, whether or not it is worn

I have no experience with editing tags, do I understand correctly, that I can simply correct posts with false or missing tags as described in these "projects"?
I also noticed another one:
camel_toe rear_view -camel_toe_from_behind most of these are missing the "camel_toe_from_behind" tag

salmonrunner said:
I have no experience with editing tags, do I understand correctly, that I can simply correct posts with false or missing tags as described in these "projects"?
I also noticed another one:
camel_toe rear_view -camel_toe_from_behind most of these are missing the "camel_toe_from_behind" tag

You can.

This search looks too general to me.
Here's a version that is perhaps slightly too narrow, but should catch most cases, without false-positives.
camel_toe rear_view solo -camel_toe_from_behind -multiple_scenes

multiple_scenes and the possibility of the two tags you think are linked applying to different characters are some things to be careful of when constructing searches.

savageorange said:
You can.

This search looks too general to me.
Here's a version that is perhaps slightly too narrow, but should catch most cases, without false-positives.
camel_toe rear_view solo -camel_toe_from_behind -multiple_scenes

multiple_scenes and the possibility of the two tags you think are linked applying to different characters are some things to be careful of when constructing searches.

thanks for the info, but yeah, I'm definitely gonna check the image before blindly adding the tag.

With the new policy change, I think it's finally time to do something about the near-universally-misused and near-universally-misunderstood humanoid tag family.

Why? Because not only is nearly every use of one of those tags wrongly used as a synonym for anthro, the uploading guidelines, when addressing the new policy, use "Human-like" instead. The humanoid tag family is so uselessly diluted that even the site itself doesn't use it anymore.

Uploading Guidelines said:

• "Human-like" means all humanoid fantasy races, especially ones that have more skin than fur, and either no or only very minor animal features, like tails, ears, claws, etc.
• This includes, but is not limited to, elves, orcs, vampires, dwarves, gnomes, "human but has a tail and animal ears", stylized humans like The Simpsons, and similar content.

I don't know how to propose a new project/BUR though. Still a relative newcomer to e621's inner workings, I guess.

lendrimujina said:
With the new policy change, I think it's finally time to do something about the near-universally-misused and near-universally-misunderstood humanoid tag family.

Why? Because not only is nearly every use of one of those tags wrongly used as a synonym for anthro, the uploading guidelines, when addressing the new policy, use "Human-like" instead. The humanoid tag family is so uselessly diluted that even the site itself doesn't use it anymore.

I don't know how to propose a new project/BUR though. Still a relative newcomer to e621's inner workings, I guess.

If you'd like to request an alias, which is kind of what it sounds like you're trying to do, you'd go up to the top of the page and click "Request alias" or "Request BUR", you can CTRL+F those if you're not seeing what I'm talking about

Request BUR sounds more like what you're going for, are you suggesting that "humanoid" be replaced with "human-like" so it's less frequently mis-tagged? I'll admit I'm also annoyed at the overuse of the humanoid tag, but I'm not sure that an alias would solve it, since people would still just type "humanoid" when they mean "anthro" and then over time people would get the idea that "human-like" just means "human-like features" such as human hands or human-like lips or something.

"Tag Projects", what an awesome topic !
Here is an idea : solo dragon humanoid -dragon_humanoid : Either is anthro instead of humanoid (has a snout and scales), is just biped (not humanoid), or it miss the tag dragon_humanoid (those have a human face).
It is 25 pages.

mikael_the_d said:
"Tag Projects", what an awesome topic !
Here is an idea : solo dragon humanoid -dragon_humanoid : Either is anthro instead of humanoid (has a snout and scales), is just biped (not humanoid), or it miss the tag dragon_humanoid (those have a human face).
It is 25 pages.

You might quite like https://tagme.dev/

snpthecat said:
You might quite like https://tagme.dev/

Thank you. Yeah it looks like a great tool.
And the light theme is awesome with his orange gradient !

Hey! I was wondering if there was a possibility we could get new meta tags for posts with source links on different platforms (for example, posts where the source links to a twitter page can be "x_source" and posts with sources liking to FA pages could be tagged "fa_source"). I personally would really love to use it to find and follow artists I like on my other accounts without having to tediously check every post individually for sources. It could also be useful for finding artists that post to less popular sites like trello.

psychicshield777 said:
Hey! I was wondering if there was a possibility we could get new meta tags for posts with source links on different platforms (for example, posts where the source links to a twitter page can be "x_source" and posts with sources liking to FA pages could be tagged "fa_source"). I personally would really love to use it to find and follow artists I like on my other accounts without having to tediously check every post individually for sources. It could also be useful for finding artists that post to less popular sites like trello.

source:*furaf*

should we do something about leglock? at first glance it seems used for characters wrapping their legs around someone but i know it can mean something else too, that being a totally different wrestling move.

dba_afish said:
source:*furaf*

Knowing this feature exists is gonna be a massive game changer for me. I seriously can't thank you enough, you got straight to the point and gave me the perfect solution /gen

Here are a few projects that I've started doing on and off over time.

rabbit rodent. Posts that incorrectly tag rabbits as rodents, when they're actually lagomorphs. Of course, the posts will have to be checked to make sure the character isn't a hybrid or there isn't another character that actually is a rodent. The rodent tag needs to be removed.
drawing, since it's often misused by people that think it's a meta tag for drawings, when it's actually specifically for drawings within drawings. If this tag is being used as a meta tag and there's no drawing within a drawing, this needs to be removed and replaced with a more appropriate meta tag. Additionally, if we can't see a drawing with a drawing and instead only see a character drawing, this tag should be replaced with creating_art.
badge. Like with drawing, this is also sometimes misused as a meta tag for character badges, so this tag must be replaced with character_badge_(artwork) unless the character in the badge is wearing badges.
hyena canine_genitalia. Hyenas aren't canines, and thus don't have canine genitals. anatomically_inaccurate and mismatched_animal_penis/mismatched_animal_pussy must be added.
rabbit pawpads. Rabbits don't have pawpads in real life, so anatomically_inaccurate_pawpads must be added. Just be sure to make sure there isn't another character that should have pawpads or that the rabbit isn't a hybrid.

How frequently does fart get tagged on posts with cum_fart but no flatulence? Searching up fart cum_fart -fart_cloud only brung up less than a full page worth of posts thankfully.

A small project, but adding to thread because is a typo that I think will re-occur in future in e621 uploads and edits :

short version: all-or-most of 20520 tag a typo of 2020.

***

I noticed 13 posts tagged with 20520 (in general category)

So far I fixed a couple (with upload dates of 2020).

The rest are
1) mostly also with FA upload date of 2020
2) 1 or 2 with "2020" on them.
3) some deleted from FA (from e621 Sources field)

So it seems 20520 is currently all-or-mostly just typo of 2020.
(presumably from people whose computer keyboard has a Numeric_keypad
with 5 directly above the "2"
... and 5 accidentally got pressed while person pressing "2" for the 2nd time.

***
EDIT: actually, be on the lookout for any number tags that are miss-tags:

example #1: was tagged with 208, but has FA upload date of 2018
post #1914569

example #2: was tagged with 2048, but has FA upload date of 2018
post #5117048