Reasoning:

1. These are all tagged vaginal:

post #371706 post #262421 post #187872

2. Double penetration isn't even tagged as including vaginal penetration.

3. The only other person (than me) to edit the wiki was back in 2011.

4. The only other person to edit the wiki edited a ton of other wikis that blatently disregarded anything but male and female as genders. A few of his edits (1 | 2 | 3 | 4 and my favorite (unrelated) - 5.

Implication deleted

TheHuskyK9 said:
Implication deleted

That was fast. :)

None of those example images should've been tagged as triple_penetration.
That tag's specifically for simultaneous oral, anal and vaginal. Not for any combinations of three penetrations.

First two examples are double_penetration, and the third one is triple_anal.

There was no reason to delete the implication, as far as I can see. Except maybe the name: it's slightly unintuitive, we couldn't come up with a better name for "all three holes filled" the last time this came up.

Genjar said:
None of those example images should've been tagged as triple_penetration.
That tag's specifically for simultaneous oral, anal and vaginal. Not for any combinations of three penetrations.

We have tags such as triple_anal for those.

There was no reason to delete the implication, as far as I can see. Except maybe the name: it's slightly unintuitive, we couldn't come up with a better name for "all three holes filled" the last time this came up.

Triple anal is a type of triple penetration. So is triple vaginal and triple oral. Double anal is a type of double penetration. So is double vaginal and double oral. You can double/triple/etc. penetrate someone without penetrating them vaginally

TheHuskyK9 said:
Triple anal is a type of triple penetration.

No, triple_penetration was only tagged for specific combo: for simultaneous oral, anal, and vaginal. All three at once.

At least that's how it's been used since the previous admin decision (see forum #103020, though RD is no longer an admin). If we're no longer going to tag it that way, then we need a new tag for "all three holes filled".

In the previous thread, 123easy suggested tagging those as all_orifices_filled, but that's probably too long..

How about all_three_filled?

Because all_orifices_filled/all_holes_filled could be a gay male in a spitroast filed at both ends, so it's not quite clear enough but it's close.

And triple_* anything asks to be confused with triple_penetration, because the names would be too similar for tags which share subject matter. Otherwise I'd suggest something like "triple_stuffed" but I think it would end up confusing usage for both tags. Too similar.

I do agree with breaking the implication of triple_penetration and vaginal_penetration though. It had several problems, but the biggest of all was that "triple penetration" does not equal "anal/oral/vaginal-combination-only". And by using it that way here, we were using a non-standard definition. If you search "triple penetration" on the internet and various porn sites, you will find every single combination imaginable for 3 penetrations in any combination of holes. You can even see "triple penetration" being used for male gay porn (where vaginal is not even an option generally speaking). So it shouldn't be a surprise that images kept getting tagged in the broader sense of "three penetrations at once" instead of staying strictly oral/anal/vaginal-only despite our wiki's attempts to make it oddly specific. Coming up with an alternative name for oral/anal/vaginal-combination-stuffed-at-the-same-time is gonna take some thinking. But I do think this is a step in the right direction. Using non-standard definitions for commonly used terms is just asking for trouble - especially as the site continues to grow and expand with more users.

Now, all_three_filled isn't the best term in the world. It's a little vague and probably made up. But it does naturally exclude those with less than 3 holes to fill...which makes it mainly apply to herms and females (which is what we need it to do). It's not perfect but it's in the right direction at least. I'm hoping we can come up with something better. But even if we can't, then I think all_three_filled would at least get the job done if combined with a good wiki to make up for the vagueness.

furrypickle said:
How about all_three_filled?

That's simple and descriptive, and not too vague. Unless someone can come up with even better suggestion, my vote goes for that.

I do agree with breaking the implication of triple_penetration and vaginal_penetration though. It had several problems, but the biggest of all was that "triple penetration" does not equal "anal/oral/vaginal-combination-only". And by using it that way here, we were using a non-standard definition. If you search "triple penetration" on the internet and various porn sites, you will find every single combination imaginable for 3 penetrations in any combination of holes.

Fair enough.
Though major boorus use triple_penetration specifically for "all holes filled" (and double_penetration for two holes) and don't seem to have much trouble keeping those in order. For example, here's Danbooru's definition:

But using all_three_filled seems like a better idea.
Though that makes our triple_penetration tag a bit too generic for my tastes. Is there really any point in tagging specifically three penetrations? Maybe it could be aliased away to multi_penetration...

I like furrypickle's solution, as usual :P

The only problem I can foresee is misusing for when characters have more than three holes to fill, but I think that just a bit of tag maintenance every now and then wouldn't be too difficult.

The only better thing I could think of was airtight_seal, but that's a pretty unintuitive name.

furrypickle said:
It had several problems, but the biggest of all was that "triple penetration" does not equal "anal/oral/vaginal-combination-only". And by using it that way here, we were using a non-standard definition.

This definition that we're using now is a non-standard definition. I've never heard of it being used that way, and it's not anywhere on urban dictionary nor can I find it anywhere else.

I think that it would be best to alias it to multiple_penetration, if we're not going to use it for something specific. That better fits the 1, 2, many pattern that we use for other tags.

Beanjam said:
This definition that we're using now is a non-standard definition. I've never heard of it being used that way, and it's not anywhere on urban dictionary nor can I find it anywhere else.

I think that it would be best to alias it to multiple_penetration, if we're not going to use it for something specific. That better fits the 1, 2, many pattern that we use for other tags.

it's not anywhere on urban dictionary

Literally the first definition:

This is where a woman is penetrated by three men with the penises in different combinations in the anus or vagina eg 2 in the vagina and 1 in the anus.

Also, just looking at the first google result for "triple penetration" shows no oral either.

In other news, now that I realize that airtight_seal apparently isn't very original, I say we just use hermetic_seal and make it specific to herms instead.