Aliasing heart_marking &rarr; <3_marking
Link to alias

Reason:

Same tag, same meaning, matches the other <3_* tag standards.

Related aliases

• heart marking → <3 marking
• heart nipples → <3 nipples
• heart nose → <3 nose
• heart pastie → <3 pastie
• heart pattern → <3 pattern

Related implications

• <3 pastie → pasties

Related:

• heart_pattern -> <3_pattern — forum #250846
• heart_censor -> <3_censor — forum #213932
• hand_heart -> hand_<3 — forum #231764

is starting to feel a bit out of place now that we've got rid of most of the symbol tags. Maybe they should just be flipped around, and heart_* adopted as the new standard?

Also implicate most of them to <3

Genjar said:
<3 is starting to feel a bit out of place now that we've got rid of most of the symbol tags. Maybe they should just be flipped around, and heart_* adopted as the new standard?

I thought that using "<3" was to further distinguish the symbol from heart_(organ)

darryus said:
I thought that using "<3" was to further distinguish the symbol from heart_(organ)

Looks like it's distinguished enough as it is with that "(organ)" suffix, no reason to distinguish it further.

Also...heart_(organ) has 110 images...<3 has 80,000+. Let me type that again: EIGHTY THOUSAND. So if your argument is "we need to keep "<3" around to further differentiate it from this thing that pops up .001% of the time" that's not compelling to me.

The reason we got rid of most symbols is that they can't be typed without some fancy keyboard or Alt codes.

Dyrone said:
Looks like it's distinguished enough as it is with that "(organ)" suffix, no reason to distinguish it further.

Also...heart_(organ) has 110 images...<3 has 80,000+. Let me type that again: EIGHTY THOUSAND. So if your argument is "we need to keep "<3" around to further differentiate it from this thing that pops up in .001% of the time" that's not compelling to me.

Currently, if someone tags a post which contains a heart organ as heart it gets aliased to <3 so a cursory glance at the tag list it's fairly obvious that they mistagged something. If the current aliasing was inverted and heart was the default tag for the symbol a mistake like this would be more likely to go unnoticed for longer periods.

I mean this is a perfect world example since we're assuming that peeps are actually going to check to make sure they tagged stuff correctly, but, as evidenced by the considerable failure of *_(disambiguation) tags, this is not a perfect world.

darryus said:
Currently, if someone tags a post which contains a heart organ as heart it gets aliased to <3 so a cursory glance at the tag list it's fairly obvious that they mistagged something. If the current aliasing was inverted and heart was the default tag for the symbol a mistake like this would be more likely to go unnoticed for longer periods.

I'm not even going to answer this...because statistically this situation doesn't matter...and there's no hard proof that <3 remedies it. I will bet you dollars to donuts that if you had the determination to flip through the thousands of pages of <3 images you'd find at least one that had a real heart...it doesn't solve anything.

Oh shit...here's one now: post #1000027

Well fuck me I thought the <3 was supposed to save us from this mistake!

Furrin_Gok said:
The reason we got rid of most symbols is that they can't be typed without some fancy keyboard or Alt codes.

Cool factoid, but now we can get rid of "<3" because its incongruous with the rest of the site's tags.

Dyrone said:
I'm not even going to answer this...because statistically this situation doesn't matter...and there's no hard proof that <3 remedies it. I will bet you dollars to donuts that if you had the determination to flip through the thousands of pages of <3 images you'd find at least one that had a real heart...it doesn't solve anything.

Oh shit...here's one now: post #1000027

Well fuck me I thought the <3 was supposed to save us from this mistake!

People suck at tagging, everyone here already knows that, I even mentioned that in my post, It doesn't change the possibility that a moderately attentive person would notice a mistake and fix it.

Wait, what's that? There's actually an example the exact thing I described happening? Multiple examples? *bam* *bam* "*bam*":post_tag_history/index?post_id=1076838 *bam*

And that's only the ones that showed up before the tag history search started giving me error 500s. _{Actually that's pretty much all the examples, all the ones before that one were a tagging project (I think it's the initial creation of the tag) by furrypickle}

darryus said:
People suck at tagging, everyone here already knows that, I even mentioned that in my post, It doesn't change the possibility that a moderately attentive person would notice a mistake and fix it.

Wait, what's that? There's actually an example the exact thing I described happening? Multiple examples? *bam* *bam* *bam* *bam*

And that's only the ones that showed up before the tag history search started giving me error 500s. _{Actually that's pretty much all the examples, all the ones before that one were a tagging project (I think it's the initial creation of the tag) by furrypickle}

So this tag has been used 80k times and it's saved us three times? Big whoop...like I said it's negligible and should have no bearing on what the tag is named. If anything you're just proving my point.

Dyrone said:
So this tag has been used 80k times and it's saved us three times? Big whoop...like I said it's negligible and should have no bearing on what the tag is named. If anything you're just proving my point.

No, heart_(organ) has been tagged 83 times and 4 of the maybe 10-15 times it was mistagged as <3 it was fixed within 24 hours, usually by the uploader.

I also want to point out that the tag has only been linked to on the <3 wiki page since late 2017 so people prior to that wouldn't have a way of finding the correct tag without having to tag search for heart*, which most users probably don't even know is a thing that you can do.

darryus said:
No, heart_(organ) has been tagged 83 times and 4 of the maybe 10-15 times it was mistagged as <3 it was fixed within 24 hours, usually by the uploader.

Sorry, but you only linked 3 cases, the 4th link 404'd. 3 or 4 doesn't really matter, you're splitting hairs and making mountains out of molehills.

darryus said:
I also want to point out that the tag has only been linked to on the <3 wiki page since late 2017 so people prior to that wouldn't have a way of finding the correct tag without having to tag search for heart*, which most users probably don't even know is a thing that you can do.

heart_(organ) would still be linked on the wiki page if it was heart...again, this is a non-argument, you seem fond of making those.

Dyrone said:
Sorry, but you only linked 3 cases, the 4th link 404'd. 3 or 4 doesn't really matter, you're splitting hairs and making mountains out of molehills.

heart_(organ) would still be linked on the wiki page if it was heart...again, this is a non-argument, you seem fond of making those.

Helpful is helpful. When I notice that my tag get severely changed I investigate. And if I see something out of place in my search, I correct it.

Bumping the reverse of the alias (<3_marking -> heart_marking), and probably add heart_shaped_fur and heart_mark to the alias as well.

Double bumping with a revised version of the alias list (just in case the reverse of the original alias is preferred).

Tag Alias:

• <3_marking -> heart_marking
• heart_shaped_fur -> heart_marking
• heart_mark -> heart_marking
• <3_nipples -> heart_nipples
• <3_areola -> heart_nipples
• <3_nose -> heart_nose
• heart_shaped_nose -> heart_nose
• <3_pastie -> heart_pastie
• pastie -> pasties
• <3_pattern -> heart_pattern
• hand_<3 -> hand_heart
• <3_background -> heart_background
• <3_tail -> heart_tail
• heart_butt -> butt_heart
• <3_butt -> butt_heart
• <3_panties -> heart_panties
• <3_pawpads -> heart_pawpads

Tag Implication:

• <3_pastie -> pastie (heart_pastie is already aliased to heart_pasties, which is itself implicated to pasties)

Reverse Tag Alias:

• <3_censor -> heart_censor
• <3_eyes -> heart_eyes

D.D.M. said:
Double bumping with a revised version of the alias list (just in case the reverse of the original alias is preferred).

Tag Alias:

• <3_marking -> heart_marking
• heart_shaped_fur -> heart_marking
• heart_mark -> heart_marking
• <3_nipples -> heart_nipples
• <3_areola -> heart_nipples
• <3_nose -> heart_nose
• heart_shaped_nose -> heart_nose
• <3_pastie -> heart_pastie
• pastie -> pasties
• <3_pattern -> heart_pattern
• hand_<3 -> hand_heart
• <3_background -> heart_background
• <3_tail -> heart_tail
• heart_butt -> butt_heart
• <3_butt -> butt_heart
• <3_panties -> heart_panties
• <3_pawpads -> heart_pawpads

Tag Implication:

• <3_pastie -> pastie (heart_pastie is already aliased to heart_pasties, which is itself implicated to pasties)

Reverse Tag Alias:

• <3_censor -> heart_censor
• <3_eyes -> heart_eyes

+1 to this, Phasing out emoticons like that leaves the symbols available for scripts and formatting.

Bringing this back up. heart_marking and <3_marking are both > 100 posts each. I don't see a noticeable difference between the two.

Posts listed under heart_tail should probably be moved to tail_heart before that tag gets treated like other body related heart tags. The definition for that tag currently is similar to hand_heart.

Was it ever decided whether the site's rolling with <3_* or heart_* ?

I'm not sure about which was decided, but I can compile and submit a BUR for the <3_* and heart_* tags. I just need to know which set of tags folks prefer to keep.

I don't have a strong preference, but I'd be in favor of "heart". Easier to parse.

I'd prefer <3, since heart could be a literal heart, whereas the <3 shape is more of a symbol. Like the difference between male and ♂.

watsit said:
I'd prefer <3, since heart could be a literal heart, whereas the <3 shape is more of a symbol. Like the difference between male and ♂.

In that case, why not go the full mile and use a unicode character ♥️ instead of leetspeak?

strikerman said:
In that case, why not go the full mile and use a unicode character ♥️ instead of leetspeak?

I wouldn't be opposed, with the proper aliases in place.

It was discussed here - topic #19294, but it fell off the radar.
I talked about differentiating between <3 and heart since people tend to tag <3 for the symbol and heart for the organ.

Personally I feel that symbol tags should be avoided if possible (as it's difficult to "type out" a symbol/unicode character, exceptions for unique ones like ♂) and a word tag be used in its place.
So, +1 to <3 --> heart and related tags, BUT not before de-aliasing <3 and re-aliasing it to heart_symbol.

strikerman said:
In that case, why not go the full mile and use a unicode character ♥️ instead of leetspeak?

-1 on that, multiple users have already voiced opposition in maintaining <3 in the other thread.

On this unicode character (♥️) specifically, I feel that it should not be aliased to heart and be used exclusively for its appearance as a suit_symbol. It should not be used as an alternative tag for heart or heart_symbol.
Currently, ♦, ♣, ♠ are implicated to suit_symbol but ♥️ is not for some reason.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Currently, ♦, ♣, ♠ are implicated to suit_symbol but ♥️ is not for some reason.

Probably because those three are almost exclusively used as the suit_symbols; whereas the heart is widely used outside of card suits.

I would be okay with using the unicode heart for the tag, so long as <3 and heart_symbol are aliased to it.

I also prefer the idea of keeping a separation between the heart_symbol and the heart tag, and use the later for the actual heart_(organ). This would sort of be in line with the site's use of x-ray (even if it is often mistagged).

riverinadryland said:
Probably because those three are almost exclusively used as the suit_symbols; whereas the heart is widely used outside of card suits.

I would be okay with using the unicode heart for the tag, so long as <3 and heart_symbol are aliased to it.

Sorry, I edited my previous reply. Just realised that ♥️ and heart have already been aliased to <3, and users in the other thread are opposed to using <3.
Still, I'm against using ♥️ as the main heart tag as it becomes impossible to type out (and new users have to wonder how to search for ♥️ and ♥️_* tags).

I also prefer the idea of keeping a separation between the heart_symbol and the heart tag, and use the later for the actual heart_(organ). This would sort of be in line with the site's use of x-ray (even if it is often mistagged).

Actually, I have also suggested to disambiguate heart in the other thread as I find that it can often be mistagged as well, just like x-ray in topic #26788.

As it currently stands, the heart/<3/♥️ alias is flawed.
People tend to tag <3 when they see the a heart symbol (similarly to </3) and tag heart when they see the organ, but now it's all aliased into one single <3 tag.
So when people search for heart (to find the organ), they get <3 instead.

I'd suggest an overhaul of the <3 wiki page, alongside the already discussed changes.

I don't see the point in changing, renaming, or disambiguating a tag that seems to function perfectly fine as is.

Umm... any other input? So far things seem evenly split between <3_* and heart_*.

I'm currently uncertain about changing the <3 tag, but the argument for using heart_symbol or <3_symbol instead does make sense. And I think utilizing the heart_(organ) tag for the organ is better than utilizing heart for it, since heart is rather ambiguous.

d.d.m. said:
Umm... any other input? So far things seem evenly split between <3_* and heart_*.

I'm currently uncertain about changing the <3 tag, but the argument for using heart_symbol or <3_symbol instead does make sense. And I think utilizing the heart_(organ) tag for the organ is better than utilizing heart for it, since heart is rather ambiguous.

Most of the arguments are already for the <3_* to heart_* move, so you can start with that if you'd want (and vote on it properly if people are still somehow opposed to it).

As for the actual <3 and heart tag, they are both still aliased together. So, if a disambiguation tag were to come from this, I'd highly suggest un-aliasing <3 first since it is commonly used to tag heart_symbol.

I didn't know folks were more in favor of the heart_* tags. The switch from <3_* to heart_* will probably take several separate BURs to complete, but I'll start on the initial one. A BUR may need to be made specifically for de-aliasing heart -> <3 as well (along with any other tags that need to be de-aliased, in order to shift around the aliases in another BUR).

d.d.m. said:
I didn't know folks were more in favor of the heart_* tags. The switch from <3_* to heart_* will probably take several separate BURs to complete, but I'll start on the initial one. A BUR may need to be made specifically for de-aliasing heart -> <3 as well (along with any other tags that need to be de-aliased, in order to shift around the aliases in another BUR).

I'm not sure people _are_ more in favor of heart_* over <3_*, much less changing the <3 tag itself. there's really only a couple peeps in this thread discussing at this point.

In my opinion; <3 and <3_* work. it's clear what the tags are meant for and, to reiterate what I posted way up near the top, "heart" is somewhat easy to accidentally put on posts meant for heart_(organ) and having the tag be like this does, in most cases, make people realize when they've misstagged.
I don't see a point in alias swapping a perfectly good tag because a couple of users might think that it looks tacky.

d.d.m. said:
I didn't know folks were more in favor of the heart_* tags.

darryus said:
I'm not sure people _are_ more in favor of heart_* over <3_*,

Taking into account all of the other threads mentioned here and minus a few yes-mans, I count:

• 6 for heart_* ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}
• 3 for <3_* ^{[1] [2] [3]}
• 4 for either/standardisation ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}
• 1 for ♥️_* ^[1]

Either way, we will need to wait for the BUR to vote properly. Preferably in a separate thread.

Count me in for <3_* since I like the emoticon. It's not die-hard though, standardization is best.