So you have the realistic tag, which gives the definition "This tag is used when a character is designed in a style more artistic than in its original toon." How the tag gets used is mostly not that. On the tag_group:art page it's listed under style, which is also a bit at odds with the definition given.
Should this definition be revised to something closer to how it's actually used, should stricter use be enforced, or should it be invalidated?

Then there's realistic_feral and anatomically_correct_feral. Both are defined as 'realistic body proportions, anatomy, movements, and positions' with 'anatomically_correct' specifying a "cartoony" style. How these tags actually get used doesn't completely match up.
'Realistic' frequently gets tagged on images with anthropomorphic expressions, flat or stylized rendering, and unrealistic movement. On top of that, just searching realistic feral or photorealism feral gets results that are closer to the definition given on the wiki page.
Meanwhile there's a much smaller sample for 'anatomically_correct' but frankly it is largely images that would not look out of place in the 'realistic' results.

I do think there's utility for a tag like this- someone who's not necessarily averse to toony ferals but draws the line at dogs that are shaped like dogs might want to blacklist it. Conversely someone who likes feral but not when dogs are shaped like beans would want to search it. The issue is getting one tag with clear criteria.

I think that realistic_feral and anatomically_correct_feral should be aliased together. They're just about identical except style, which is not ideal for separation, especially for something so ambiguous.
A tag that just means a feral that actually looks like a feral animal has value, but when it's a mess they just won't get used.

I think anatomically_correct_feral is the best name. Drop the sexual and cartoony requirements, and alias the others to it.

The bulk update request #7143 has been rejected.

create alias realistic_feral (3914) -> anatomically_correct_feral (84)

Reason: see above

EDIT: The bulk update request #7143 (forum #396175) has been rejected by @SCTH.

Also see discussion in https://e621.net/forum_topics/42869, which would have to be rejected first.

scth said:
Reason: see above

The other way around. "Anatomically correct" doesn't relate to the general design/style, but whether certain parts are "correct" for the species (e.g. a sheath on a canine). anatomically_correct_feral should probably be aliased to feral or anatomically_correct.

watsit said:
The other way around. "Anatomically correct" doesn't relate to the general design/style, but whether certain parts are "correct" for the species (e.g. a sheath on a canine). anatomically_correct_feral should probably be aliased to feral or anatomically_correct.

I suppose, I just feel realistic_feral seems too much like realistic feral

scth said:
I suppose, I just feel realistic_feral seems too much like realistic feral

No, it doesn't, because realistic specifically means a cartoony character drawn in a realistic style.

nimphia said:
No, it doesn't, because realistic specifically means a cartoony character drawn in a realistic style.

Sure but that is absolutely not how that tag is used and not how people expect it to be used. It would be easier to redefine it than clean it out and expect all users to change what they expect "realistic" to mean.

watsit said:
The other way around. "Anatomically correct" doesn't relate to the general design/style, but whether certain parts are "correct" for the species (e.g. a sheath on a canine). anatomically_correct_feral should probably be aliased to feral or anatomically_correct.

Admittedly, there aren't that many examples of this, but anatomically_correct feral != anatomically_correct_feral. You can have an image where there's an anthro subject with anatomically correct genitalia, and a feral subject without anatomically correct genitalia, which I see most often with female ferals since it's less taboo for males to have sheaths for some reason. In those cases, it can be useful to have a separate tag if you're specifically looking for ferals who are anatomically correct, but given how few examples I could find, I can see the argument for how it isn't worth it having a form-specific tag for this.

kyureki said:
Admittedly, there aren't that many examples of this, but anatomically_correct feral != anatomically_correct_feral. You can have an image where there's an anthro subject with anatomically correct genitalia, and a feral subject without anatomically correct genitalia, which I see most often with female ferals since it's less taboo for males to have sheaths for some reason. In those cases, it can be useful to have a separate tag if you're specifically looking for ferals who are anatomically correct, but given how few examples I could find, I can see the argument for how it isn't worth it having a form-specific tag for this.

Also there's plenty of ferals with incorrect or mismatched genitals. Plus there's a good deal of clean, but not safe by the rating system, feral art with sheaths or visible vulvas because lions don't wear pants.

The bulk update request #7143 (forum #396175) has been rejected by @SCTH.

I still think these should be aliased together as the distinction is more harmful than helpful. Neither name works well, though.