The bulk update request #6715 is pending approval.

Reason: These tags are kind of a mess and need to be standardized.

Amputation of some body parts is aliased to missing_* while others aren't. I feel this is incorrect- a limb or tail can be partially amputated without being totally missing.
post #4401995 and post #4568181 are pretty obviously not the same.
Personally I feel missing_* should be reserved for when at least ~75% of the body part has been removed. A little bit of wiggle-room to allow for small stumps.

Because they're redundant removed_* should get aliased to amputated_*.

Certain plural forms like 'legs' should be aliased to singular forms.

We don't need three different categories of limb removal (i.e., missing_*, severed_*, and now amputated_*) to add on to more confusion as to which tag to use.
I'd suggest either a complete alias of amputated_* to amputation or create a disambiguation tag for differentiating it between missing_* and severed_*.

As for your argument on "partially amputated" limbs, I don't really see why missing_* wouldn't already cover that. It can be missing the body part, either partially or whole.
There is no need for creating technicalities on where the literal cutoff line is when no real problems exist about it's current use.
If you still want some kind of solution to resolve that matter, then I would suggest having additional subtags like missing_forearm or missing_lower_leg to cover it.

thegreatwolfgang said:
We don't need three different categories of limb removal (i.e., missing_*, severed_*, and now amputated_*) to add on to more confusion as to which tag to use.
I'd suggest either a complete alias of amputated_* to amputation or create a disambiguation tag for differentiating it between missing_* and severed_*.

As for your argument on "partially amputated" limbs, I don't really see why missing_* wouldn't already cover that. It can be missing the body part, either partially or whole.
There is no need for creating technicalities on where the literal cutoff line is when no real problems exist about it's current use.
If you still want some kind of solution to resolve that matter, then I would suggest having additional subtags like missing_forearm or missing_lower_leg to cover it.

I can see that solution working for forearms and such, but less so for tails. 'Missing tail' would seem strange on a post like this:
post #4352883

Plus a body part can be missing, but not amputated. Portal amputation can create the appearance of missing and detatched limbs without amputation. Then there's odd cases like this
post #4591552
Someone looking for stuff like that might not be interested in gore or scars.

regsmutt said:
I can see that solution working for forearms and such, but less so for tails. 'Missing tail' would seem strange on a post like this:
post #4352883

Think you'd come across the same issue with docked_tail but I digress.
I would still consider that as missing_tail, just like how geckos would self-amputate their tails (i.e., autotomy) but still have some parts of it left for regeneration.
I can also see how it could be applied to missing_finger whereby only tip of the finger is missing, instead of the whole thing.

However, I don't think people would really care about the technicalities. Maybe have tags like missing_tail_tip or missing_fingertip if that is much of an issue?

Plus a body part can be missing, but not amputated. Portal amputation can create the appearance of missing and detatched limbs without amputation. Then there's odd cases like this
post #4591552
Someone looking for stuff like that might not be interested in gore or scars.

Missing =/= Amputation. They are two different things.
This post would be missing_arm, arm_in_portal, detached_arm (if visibly present), and portal_amputation.
It should not be tagged with amputation or severed_arm.