Posted under General
Should the posts in pool #5719 be tagged with the location they represent? E.g. post #1302859 - tokyo, post #1211631 - ishikawa (well, that's already a GITS character), post #1227410 - yamanashi, post #1397942 - osaka_(city) (although really she's meant to represent Osaka Prefecture)?
Updated by jxh2154
I wouldn't, since the city isn't depicted and the they aren't city personifications either.
(BTW, could we move the artist tokyo to a less ambiguous tag such as tokyo_(great_akuta)?
S1eth said:
(BTW, could we move the artist tokyo to a less ambiguous tag such as tokyo_(great_akuta)?
I agree, done.
NWF_Renim said:
You seriously should have waited before making changes like that and give time for other people to give input.
First, the Tokyo location itself has qualification _(city). Secondly, I'm adding qualification, not removing it. As long as a tag is unique, jxh2154 can always alias it to another tag should the need arise. I believe leaving an ambiguous tag around is more harmful, because forum discussion being forgotten is not that rare.
Moving is common in artist gardening, and the practice is leaving a note in the old tag saying where it has been moved to. I do ask for alias whenever it's possible in topic #7713.
If my actions seem hasty, I apologize. But I think this move is common sense and I know what I'm doing with artists.
Sal.N said:
First, the Tokyo location itself has qualification _(city). Secondly, I'm adding qualification, not removing it. As long as a tag is unique, jxh2154 can always alias it to another tag should the need arise. I believe leaving an ambiguous tag around is more harmful, because forum discussion being forgotten is not that rare.
That's not an excuse for not giving the proper amount of time for others to be able to include their own input on the matter. The thread is only 5 hours old and the proposal on the Tokyo tag (which has been around in this current usage for years) was only just brought up 4 hours ago (3 or less hours by the time you took your actions). Being "forgotten" is not an issue in regards to this thread at the moment.
Sal.N said:
Moving is common in artist gardening, and the practice is leaving a note in the old tag saying where it has been moved to. I do ask for alias whenever it's possible in topic #7713.
As I point out, the tag has been used for the artist for years. Certainly moving tags is common, but we still give pause to hear others' opinions when changing over 300+ images from something that has been used for awhile before making said changes.
I understand that sometimes these things seem overly obvious and we all have our own time frames of having the time to make edits, but it is still proper courtesy to allow the time for others to have a say on the matter, even if it'll all simply be voices of agreement on the matter in the end. A forum is a place for discussion after all.
Updated
NWF_Renim said:
Sal.N said:
because forum discussion being forgotten is not that rare.That's not an excuse for not giving the proper amount of time for others to be able to include their own input on the matter. The thread is only 5 hours old and the proposal on the Tokyo tag (which as been around in this current usage for years) was only just brought up 4 hours ago (3 or less hours by the time you took your actions). Being "forgotten" is not an issue in regards to this thread at the moment.
Please read the part you quoted in its full sentence.
NWF_Renim said:
As I point out, the tag has been used for the artist for years. Certainly moving tags is common, but we still give pause to hear others' opinions when changing over 300+ images from something that has been used for awhile before making said changes.
I've said everything in:
As long as a tag is unique, jxh2154 can always alias it to another tag should the need arise. I believe leaving an ambiguous tag around is more harmful, because forum discussion being forgotten is not that rare.
If the above isn't sufficient, I'll explain my reasoning in details:
1. 'Tokyo' is ambiguous. It shouldn't be used as an artist tag nor aliased to anything when the city itself has qualification. Which means moving is the only option.
2. If moving is the only option, then the only debate is moving to what. Should I wait for input from other users because they might know his full name, instead of using handle_(circle)? My answer is no, I shouldn't wait because of 4 reasons:
Weighing the pros and cons, I believe it's better to go with what I did, i.e. disambiguous the tag when I still remember it. There're ~400 artists with 300+ posts, ~800 artists with 200+ posts, and ~2300 artists with 100+ posts. I'd like to spend time organizing the artist database than to ask every single time "am I allowed to move this" for cases that my experience tells me yes.
Updated
jjj14 said:
Should the posts in pool #5719 be tagged with the location they represent? E.g. post #1302859 - tokyo, post #1211631 - ishikawa (well, that's already a GITS character), post #1227410 - yamanashi, post #1397942 - osaka_(city) (although really she's meant to represent Osaka Prefecture)?
I would, personally. Otherwise, there's no way to know what place they correspond to. The Pixiv posts seem to be tagged with the place name too.
S1eth said:
(BTW, could we move the artist tokyo to a less ambiguous tag such as tokyo_(great_akuta)?
I agree, tokyo is too ambiguous and confusing.
@Sal.N
Waiting more than 3 hours to move (without an alias) a long-established artist with 300+ posts wouldn't have damaged anything. Even if you personally forgot about it, there's a high chance someone else would have taken care of it.
Generally changing artists tags like this is a no-brainer, so that's fine, though waiting a bit can't hurt. I do normally do aliases for artists with >100 posts, even if they're single names, but "tokyo" might be too ambiguous even for the tag count... so I think we're okay with a move and wiki note here.
Bumping this, since it got derailed by the tag moving discussion with only two people giving input on the pool #5719 question (one for tagging locations and one against).
jjj14 said: Bumping this, since it got derailed by the tag moving discussion with only two people giving input on the pool #5719 question (one for tagging locations and one against).
It feels a little weird to do so but I'm okay with it as an exception. Go for t.
