About flat chest and breasts

A question about flat chest tag, should the child posts edited according to the wiki "Not for use with child depictions", since as far as I remember evazion didn't made a comment about nuking the child tag (topic #23538).

And an (probably obvious) observation about the breasts tag, I was using ai:breasts to go through some untagged posts but there's just too much and some new uploads also don't tag them so it feels kinda futile. Also there are 247k posts without size modifier "breasts -small_breasts -medium_breasts -large_breasts -huge_breasts" (w/o gigantic). It needs tag gardening or more recognition as something to tag, since can't nuke because it's a coomer tag.

BUR #18762 has been rejected.

mass update solo flat_chest rating:g child -> -flat_chest

I'll just make a BUR about the flat chest question on this topic.

Checking some more there's also this one that wasn't resolved about flat chest/breasts: topic #17726
But it's around 200 posts so not an issue.

I don't know about this BUR, because child and its related tags are a complete mess. There are so many examples of clearly teenage characters that should never be considered "children." One example of a clearly middle school age character someone went through and added child to a random bunch of flat chest or small breasts depictions of her. At least some of those shouldn't be tagged child.

blindVigil said:

I don't know about this BUR, because child and its related tags are a complete mess. There are so many examples of clearly teenage characters that should never be considered "children." One example of a clearly middle school age character someone went through and added child to a random bunch of flat chest or small breasts depictions of her. At least some of those shouldn't be tagged child.

Yes, that is true. I'm more or less using the BUR to see some feedback on whether we can just outright remove them with a BUR and about what we should check if we were to manually remove them if the BUR fails.

I don't want to drag the BUR for 30 days actually, I'll probably forget about it.
Do you guys have anything to add before I manually check it @AngryZapdos @avidbookreader @Unbreakable ?

The bulk update request #18762 (forum #249304) has been rejected by @pronebone.

...according to the wiki "Not for use with child depictions"

I didn't even realise that was a clause in the wiki. It's very stupid and reminds me of short_hair, where the wiki used to say that it should never be used on male characters because their hair is usually short. Naturally, after some discussion about how asinine that was, the clause was removed. I'd like to see the same happen for flat_chest.

AngryZapdos said:

I didn't even realise that was a clause in the wiki. It's very stupid and reminds me of short_hair, where the wiki used to say that it should never be used on male characters because their hair is usually short. Naturally, after some discussion about how asinine that was, the clause was removed. I'd like to see the same happen for flat_chest.

I see, that's a valid concern. Especially when everything surrounding breasts and flat chest seems to be kind of a mess. I'll refrain from editing the rest then.

AngryZapdos said:

I didn't even realise that was a clause in the wiki. It's very stupid and reminds me of short_hair, where the wiki used to say that it should never be used on male characters because their hair is usually short. Naturally, after some discussion about how asinine that was, the clause was removed. I'd like to see the same happen for flat_chest.

+1
I support removing that clause.

I would also support that.
I remember this idea came up back when I reworked the chest tags 3 years ago. Here's Evazion's comment about it forum #175997.

Admiral_Pectoral said:

I remember this idea came up back when I reworked the chest tags 3 years ago. Here's Evazion's comment about it forum #175997.

By the way, didn't talk about the men part of the topic since you're the male focus connoisseur so you'd know better.

Looks like the clause original added for loli/child because it's usually redundant, then changed to just for child. So there wasn't some other reason for it. Agreed with removing it. It's not like breasts are (intentionally) untagged on General posts.

pronebone said:

By the way, didn't talk about the men part of the topic since you're the male focus connoisseur so you'd know better.

I knew about it but I just didn't know what to do to fix it tbh. I have enough BURs brewing in my mind as it is lol

@evazion
What do you think about removing that clause from the flat chest wiki.
Also about the mistagged/untagged breasts tag, what's your plans on it. Should users use their manpower gardening that seemingly futile effort?

What do you think about removing that clause from the flat chest wiki.

It reminds me that I need to nuke the child tag because tagging breast size on children is utterly insane. It proves the tag is not actually about wholesome innocent depictions of children. If you feel the need to tag a little girl's breast size then that's a sign it should be tagged loli instead.

Flat chest is not for males either. It baffles me that anyone would even think this.

I guess the solution is to just make a new tag for male characters then. Flat male chest or something similar. I'm thinking it would be only for exposed chests as well? But not sure. A topic should be opened to discuss this, but I'm not gonna be the one to make it, sorry.

A reminder that the flat chest wiki does say it's usable for otoko no ko characters though.

Also about the mistagged/untagged breasts tag, what's your plans on it. Should users use their manpower gardening that seemingly futile effort?

It's up to you. Every common tag has thousands to tens of thousands of untagged posts. AI tags were added exactly so these posts could be found. Breasts is not unique in this regard, it's literally every large tag on the site that has thousands of untagged posts. Which ones you want to spend your time on is up to you.

If you try to garden any large tag like breasts, what you'll probably find is most of them aren't worth the effort. Pick any common tag like smile or blush or looking at viewer or open mouth and you can easily find tens of thousands of posts where you could add the tag. But spend a few minutes on this and you'll quickly realize there's no point if you never search for these tags to begin with. You're better off picking tags you actually do search for. If you want to garden breasts, it's a lot easier to start with more specific tags like cleavage or nipples or huge breasts or sideboob, that a person might actually want to search for, rather than breasts itself, which is so broad and commonplace that it applies to half the site.

Or you could just search for ai:breasts directly and not rely on humans to tag it. Part of the point of AI tags is to allow people to search for things even if a human fails to tag it. So from a certain point of view, it doesn't even matter if breasts is untagged if you never search for it and if you're still able to find it with ai:breasts even if other people fail to tag it.

Admiral_Pectoral said:

A reminder that the flat chest wiki does say it's usable for otoko no ko characters though.

Despite what the wiki says, only about 500 of 21000 otoko_no_ko solo posts are tagged flat chest.

evazion said:

It's up to you. Every common tag has thousands to tens of thousands of untagged posts. AI tags were added exactly so these posts could be found. Breasts is not unique in this regard, it's literally every large tag on the site that has thousands of untagged posts. Which ones you want to spend your time on is up to you.
...

Thanks for the clarification, was wondering about what to do with most of the tags but the breasts with 2.6M posts seemed the most important to ask.
Then it's not viable focusing about gardening huge tags like that, so I'll just check small tags whenever I want to garden some stuff.
I also wanted to have a clear forum topic about it for others that are wondering the same thing.