Should slim and skinny be kept as separate tags, or should one be aliased to the other?

Based on the definitions of the tags and their aliases, they should be separate. Slim being someone that is lean, but not underweight. Skinny seems more like someone who is just skin and bones, severely underweight, maybe even malnourished. Unfortunately they seem to be used interchangeably in some cases.

Additionally, should they be added to the "Scale of fatness" present on the overweight, slightly_chubby, etc. pages?

Examples:

Might as well alias them, since those are tagged the same way nowadays.
I'd say that slim has decreased in usefulness over time. Slender used to be an opposite of curvy, and was tagged for body types such as these:

post #534992 post #176597 post #568605 post #492017

The 'rectangle' body shape. Balanced hips and chest ratio, with undefined waist.

But it has become too broad after the aliases, and now there's no way to search for that body type.

+1 alias

Short Version: Tagging body types without more definite criteria will probably lead to the same overlap in the future, eventually

It's the same deal with all the fat/overweight/slightly_chubby/whatever tags as well

On a side note, I noticed there's no underweight tag, but overweight exists

Maybe do something with that?

Additionally, the overweight wiki has no mention of the chubby/slightly_chubby tags (no idea what those are used for either, to be honest)

FWIW, here's that chart thing from the long version, maybe someone can improve on it and turn that into some kind of actual set for this:

A rough spectrum of body mass types:

severely malnourished -

-> malnourished -> skinny -> slim -> (toned) -> 'normal' -> 'slightly chubby' -> chubby/fat etc +

I propose

underweight (aka malnourished/starving)
skinny (aka thin/slim)
normal
slightly_chubby (aka thick)
fat (aka obese)
hyper_fat (aka holy_shit/probably_immobile)

I think we should aim to balance searchability (what users can look up) with tagability (what the average tagger know how to tag). Most people can't distinguish between overweight and obese, and worse, what I'm seeing tagged as overweight is actually obese, using the WHO definition.

titanmelon said:
FWIW, here's that chart thing from the long version, maybe someone can improve on it and turn that into some kind of actual set for this:

A rough spectrum of body mass types:

Key:

• severely malnourished -: 'i am currently starving to death / an undead skeleton'

• malnourished: exposed ribs, and skeletal system in general.
• see katzeh's art style

• skinny: ??
• slim: ??
• see barbadosslim's art style

• (toned): doesn't technically fit in here, since this is about muscle definition, not body fat. But it exists and i s relevant
• - more noticeable muscle definition than 'normal'

• 'normal': no noticeable body fat (stomach, extremities)

• 'slightly chubby': noticeable body fat
• see (some cases of) inuki's art style

• overweight +: more noticeable body fat than chubby

I like this, but I'm worried it would just result in further confusion/ambiguity. Also, while anorexic was aliased to skinny, there is still an anorexia tag.

Qmannn said:
As far as the underweight/malnourished tags go, I can't remember the last time I saw a bony character, but I have no problems with its existence.

Some examples, NSFW:

SaimonPSmith said:
Also, while anorexic was aliased to skinny, there is still an anorexia tag.

Alias changed to anorexia :)

Here's another ambiguous example, since it's in the toony style

post #631825

skinny (as in underweight/malnourished) or slim (as in petite/lithe etc.)?

---

parasprite said:
Alias changed to anorexia :)

yay

SaimonPSmith said:
I like this, but I'm worried it would just result in further confusion/ambiguity.

In what way? Because there are too many body fat categories?

titanmelon said:
Here's another ambiguous example, since it's in the toony style

post #631825

skinny (as in underweight/malnourished) or slim (as in petite/lithe etc.)?

Since even with the toon style she doesn't look emaciated, I say slim.

Furrin_Gok said:
Since even with the toon style she doesn't look emaciated, I say slim.

Agreed

-
Depending on how people are using slim and skinny, Genjar's suggestion of aliasing one to the other may be the easiest thing
-

If we do that, then all the underweight/anorexic posts (if any) from either slim/skinny should be moved to a more relevant|specific tag category

titanmelon said:
In what way? Because there are too many body fat categories?

Yes. Aren't people already/still tagging slightly_chubby when they should use overweight, and vice versa?

My only suggestion would be to combine skinny and slim, and also combine malnourished and severely_malnourished. But that might be too few tags.

Am confused by the (non-overweight) body-size tags. slim and skinny wikis don't really refer to each other.

skinny wiki says "Seems to be the middle between both Lithe and Toned body-types."

a) lithe aliases to slim.
b) for toned* tags (none with wikis) we have:
37 toned_female general
21 toned_body general
( 7 toned_stomach general )
3 toned_muscles general
( 1 toned_butt general )

(toned_body and athletic are the same body-type???)

Slim says "If a character looks uncomfortably skinny and unhealthy, please don't use this tag. Label those characters as having anorexia instead."

Going by some of those wiki pages, guessing the range might be (starting with smallest):

• anorexia
• slim (with skinny aliasing to slim?)
• athletic ?
• muscular
• slightly_chubby
• and overweight tags ( overweight wiki is very helpful, with: slightly_chubby, overweight, obese, and Morbidly_obese ).