Aliasing wingboner -> wing_boner.

Reason: Because of reason

that's a dumb tag

Spess_Muhreen said:
that's a dumb tag

Bronies have made it a thing, so it's a valid tag.

It's like a normal boner… but for the wings. May I suggest also alias it to boner aswell.

Does wing_boner really apply when there's no sexual arousal suggested? The tag page suggests yes, but I've never seen it used that way, and in fact most sites that discuss it exclusively use it in the sexual fashion.

I can't believe anyone goes looking for post #325487 when they think of wing_boner.

DrNick said:
Does wing_boner really apply when there's no sexual arousal suggested? The tag page suggests yes, but I've never seen it used that way, and in fact most sites that discuss it exclusively use it in the sexual fashion.

I can't believe anyone goes looking for post #325487 when they think of wing_boner.

Well that's not a wing boner anyway, it's flying...

I dunno that wingboners can't happen in flight, but if the character is clearly flying I would only add the tag if there was in fact some arousal obvious in the picture.

Hammie said:
Bronies have made it a thing, so it's a valid tag.

It's still a dumb tag

Hammie said:
Well that's not a wing boner anyway, it's flying...

I dunno that wingboners can't happen in flight, but if the character is clearly flying I would only add the tag if there was in fact some arousal obvious in the picture.

Sure, and I'm not too worried about flying wingboners (lol). What I mean is that there are a LOT of images tagged wing_boner when there's no sexual suggestion involved.

post #309675
post #298833
post #330797
post #326654
post #330775
post #323800
post #315370

That's just from looking over the first page of results, and I don't think any of those should be tagged wing_boner. The phrase itself implies something sexual by containing "boner".

Sorry if this is the wrong place to discuss it, but I think the non-sexual use of the tag should be re-evaluated.

DrNick said:
Sure, and I'm not too worried about flying wingboners (lol). What I mean is that there are a LOT of images tagged wing_boner when there's no sexual suggestion involved.

post #309675
post #298833
post #330797
post #326654
post #330775
post #323800
post #315370

That's just from looking over the first page of results, and I don't think any of those should be tagged wing_boner. The phrase itself implies something sexual by containing "boner".

Sorry if this is the wrong place to discuss it, but I think the non-sexual use of the tag should be re-evaluated.

According to the wiki it can also be used in a non-sexual manner.

Hammie said:
According to the wiki it can also be used in a non-sexual manner.

I know, that's my point. That definition makes no sense and I think the wiki should be revised.

DrNick said:
I know, that's my point. That definition makes no sense and I think the wiki should be revised.

That tag makes no sense to begin wtith, its basically saying anything with a wing can be tagged with wingboner. I dont care if some bronies made this a thing, you cant point this out in a image and tag it as such as its personal info thats not in TWYS.

Honestly we should get rid of this tag all together

I've seen some pics where you can tell by the dialogue, but it does seem badly overused and too generic. I agree that the wiki definition should be narrowed down.

Conker said:
That tag makes no sense to begin wtith, its basically saying anything with a wing can be tagged with wingboner. I dont care if some bronies made this a thing, you cant point this out in a image and tag it as such as its personal info thats not in TWYS.

Honestly we should get rid of this tag all together

I think when it's used in the specific context it was originally described in -- a pegasus showing sexual arousal by their wings going BOING -- it is both TWYS and applicable.

There's nothing productive to be gained by disparaging it. Subcutures come up with cute little phrases, that's part of what makes it a sub *culture*. Furries have plenty of such things, and I think that's great. It shows an idea is growing together and between people, and it's usually only those who don't like whatever subculture in general that react badly towards these neologisms.

(\ Brohoof! :P

DrNick said:
I think when it's used in the specific context it was originally described in -- a pegasus showing sexual arousal by their wings going BOING

....

Pegasus dont show sexual arousal from their wings going up, that is by far the most stupid thing I have ever heard for a tag reason. That would imply any image with a pegasus with their wings up should be marked as Rating: Explicit

Conker said:
....

Pegasus dont show sexual arousal from their wings going up, that is by far the most stupid thing I have ever heard for a tag reason. That would imply any image with a pegasus with their wings up should be marked as Rating: Explicit

They do in bronie town.

If a tag enhances searchability is it really a dumb tag? It's not like the admins are furiously stamping out tags in a warehouse somewhere and we only have a limited amount of them to go around.

Conker said:
....

Pegasus dont show sexual arousal from their wings going up, that is by far the most stupid thing I have ever heard for a tag reason.

You've seen a real pegasus? Can you show it to us? Is it blue-fured female with rainbow hair? And how on earth is it using wings for flying - it's rather impossible for creatures like that to exist in real world.

Because I was sure that they were non-existent creatures, and can be described in many ways, but apparently you know what their anatomy should be.

Azazial:
If a tag enhances searchability is it really a dumb tag?

This. We're tagging picture with one_eye_closed why shouldn't we tag stiff wings?

DrNick said:
I know, that's my point. That definition makes no sense and I think the wiki should be revised.

Definitely it shouldn't be the case that like in post #315370 tag shouldn't be add only because there is pegasus/other flying creature and you can see wings. On this post wings are not even stiff - she's flying.

I will say that whether or not we include non-sexual situations in this, we really shouldn't include images where the character's wings are extended due to being in flight.

Wouldn't spread_wing,unfurled_wings, or mantling(though I think that last one has more to do with a predatory behavior. Not sure, been a long time since biology class) be more correct, rather than implying sexual content to an otherwise non-sexual action?

Kaiselius said:
Wouldn't spread_wing,unfurled_wings, or mantling(though I think that last one has more to do with a predatory behavior. Not sure, been a long time since biology class) be more correct, rather than implying sexual content to an otherwise non-sexual action?

I'm totally for aliasing wing boner to some already existing non-mlp equivalent with similar meaning. But only spread wings already exists, it's underused and I think it applies also to creatures that are flying.

So maybe either:
a) aliasing it to spread_wings, and people can also search for spread_wings aroused -flying or something like that.
b) Change wiki definition so it would be used in pictures where it's clear that wings are stiff because of arousal. I estimate that majority of pics tagged wingboner should have tag removed.

Conker said:
....

Pegasus dont show sexual arousal from their wings going up, that is by far the most stupid thing I have ever heard for a tag reason. That would imply any image with a pegasus with their wings up should be marked as Rating: Explicit

It's an useful tag for things like this: #206844

But for still images, I think that most of them should fall under spread_wings instead of wing_boner, unless it is actually obvious from the image. Fakeedit: So basically the solution b) that Gilda suggested.

Hercules's pegasus, also pegasus work like horses with wings, its simple enough.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
You've seen a real pegasus? Can you show it to us? Is it blue-fured female with rainbow hair? And how on earth is it using wings for flying

Conker said:
Hercules's pegasus

>Real Pegasus™

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
b) Change wiki definition so it would be used in pictures where it's clear that wings are stiff because of arousal. I estimate that majority of pics tagged wingboner should have tag removed.

Totally agree. Also change wiki definition of spread_wings (accent on large size should be removed, so it could be used for all wings that not tucked in) and add wing_boner->spread_wings implication.

Conker said:
Hercules's pegasus, also pegasus work like horses with wings, its simple enough.

I don't want to break your bubble... but Hercules is not real. His pegasus also. It's just animation like MLP FIM.

And if you think that attaching wings to real horses would make them able to fly then you're wrong.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I don't want to break your bubble... but Hercules is not real. His pegasus also. It's just animation like MLP FIM.

You are aware there was shows about this, it wasnt an animation.

Rocket_Corgi said:
>Real Pegasus™

History of Greek mythology seems real enough in theory

Conker said:
You are aware there was shows about this, it wasnt an animation.

History of Greek mythology seems real enough in theory

AFAIR in greek mythology Hercules didn't have pegasus. Also if woman jumping out of her father's head seems more real than ponies to you then I have no more questions.

Conker said:
You are aware there was shows about this, it wasnt an animation.

History of Greek mythology seems real enough in theory

You aren't seriously saying that you think Greek mythology qualifies the Pegasus as an actual, living animal are you? I really hope you're not, because that's sort of sad.

I thought wingboner was aliased to invalid_tag. Maybe I'm just dumb.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
AFAIR in greek mythology Hercules didn't have pegasus. Also if woman jumping out of her father's head seems more real than ponies to you then I have no more questions.

Ponies have nothing to do with this.

This thread has gotten silly.

Makes sense for said silly tag :P

This thread has gotten silly.

Makes sense for said silly tag :P

Conker said:
Ponies have nothing to do with this.

You must be kidding. The phrase "wing-boner" originally began as a response to an image of Twilight kissing Rainbow

http://twilightflopple.deviantart.com/art/Valentine-s-Day-197427738

The ONLY place the phrase and tag exist is in the topic of Ponies.

Nevermind. Now it's pretty obviously you're just trolling.

DrNick said:

The ONLY place the phrase and tag exist is in the topic of Ponies.

Nevermind. Now it's pretty obviously you're just trolling.

No I'm not trolling, I am pointing out Pegasus dont have to do with ponies, as the idea of them was around before mlp. So therefor it has nothing to do with ponies, as they are horses with wings, not ponies.

Conker said:
No I'm not trolling, I am pointing out Pegasus dont have to do with ponies, as the idea of them was around before mlp. So therefor it has nothing to do with ponies, as they are horses with wings, not ponies.

Yes but the whole point of all that was the wing boner tag being a pony thing, even if pegasus existed before

CamKitty said:
Yes but the whole point of all that was the wing boner tag being a pony thing, even if pegasus existed before

But in the sense of tagging, you cant limit such a tag to only the "mlp" type of Pegasus, as there is more out there then mlp

Conker said:
But in the sense of tagging, you cant limit such a tag to only the "mlp" type of Pegasus, as there is more out there then mlp

No, every picture where there is evidence on picture that any creature got erect wing because of its arousal would get this tag. Not all tags that were invented by mlp fandom have no usage outside it. Only 90% of them

So did you guys ever come to a conclusion?

I'm of the opinion that it should be kept as one word to stick with the original spelling.
Additionally, wingboners are not always sexual in nature. They are NORMALLY used to indicate a MLP pegasus' excitement, not necessarily sexually.

...How does this tag still exist? Cursory glance at the tag showed not that it was just being used in any case where wings weren't tucked away. This tag is a complete mess. Clean-up? Alias? What should we do with it?

123easy said:
...How does this tag still exist? Cursory glance at the tag showed not that it was just being used in any case where wings weren't tucked away. This tag is a complete mess. Clean-up? Alias? What should we do with it?

What needs to be cleaned up about it? The wiki entry says that it applies to any image with outstretched wings (though I don't think that's really the case), and it's currently tagged to nearly 1,000 pictures, and they all have ponies with outstretched wings.

I think how this tag is actually being used is for not just outstretched wings in general, but outstretched while not actually flying. A few more searches of wing_boner seemed to indicate that this is the case.

There's also the spread_wings tag, which seems to return the same kind of result when searching, but far fewer (i.e. the bronies have been tagging wing_boner a LOT more often than anyone else has been tagging spread_wings). To me the terms are similar enough that wing_boner should probably be aliased to spread_wings, even though spread_wings is being used far less often. It's easy enough to get only MLP "wing_boner" content again by just searching for "spread_wings MLP", and if you're really picky about your wing_boners, add "-flying" to that search.

I don't normally favor a LESS popular tag over a more popular tag, but I think the more descriptive tag name would be worth it in this case.

I still think what I thought 7 months ago:
Either
a) connect it to arousal, clean it, and change wiki
b) alias it to spread wings.

BTW it's wiki was made by banned user, so I wouldn't trust it.

Char said:
What needs to be cleaned up about it? The wiki entry says that it applies to any image with outstretched wings (though I don't think that's really the case), and it's currently tagged to nearly 1,000 pictures, and they all have ponies with outstretched wings.

I think how this tag is actually being used is for not just outstretched wings in general, but outstretched while not actually flying. A few more searches of wing_boner seemed to indicate that this is the case.

There's also the spread_wings tag, which seems to return the same kind of result when searching, but far fewer (i.e. the bronies have been tagging wing_boner a LOT more often than anyone else has been tagging spread_wings). To me the terms are similar enough that wing_boner should probably be aliased to spread_wings, even though spread_wings is being used far less often. It's easy enough to get only MLP "wing_boner" content again by just searching for "spread_wings MLP", and if you're really picky about your wing_boners, add "-flying" to that search.

I don't normally favor a LESS popular tag over a more popular tag, but I think the more descriptive tag name would be worth it in this case.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I still think what I thought 7 months ago:
Either
a) connect it to arousal, clean it, and change wiki
b) alias it to spread wings.

BTW it's wiki was made by banned user, so I wouldn't trust it.

The tag was originally (I remember the arguments, not going to look up the forum posts to try to find it) defined as any case where a wing 'popped a boner', as at the time we were getting an influx of images where, for example, RD would get a kiss and her wings would snap open. Now, stupidly, I opposed that, because I just hated the influx of everything MLP swamping everything else at the time, but the tag used in that manner isn't MLP-specific; Just where the term originated from. If it keeps that connotation, that of going straight/popping open when aroused, then the tag's continued existance is perfectly fine by me. It'd need a cleanup, but that's no big deal.

It's this conflation with spread_wings that is moreso the problem; I understand that some images have spread wings when aroused, but if it lacks that stiffness you'd get from an erection, it doesn't seem correct for it to be tagged as such.

Here's the full post I should have posted when I bumped/necroed this thread, rather than just the blurb that, now that I read it after a good night's sleep, reads rather like I'm saying it should burn in hell, which isn't the case.