First off, I'd just like to say I hope I'm putting this in the right place.
So, after a recent discussion regarding a multi-limbed taur, it came to my attention that the wiki is both inconsistent and incorrect. From uni to octo it is -ped, EXCEPT for hexapeds - there it is hexapod. Not only is this inconsistent, but there IS a subtle difference in the two suffixes. -Ped is Latin and used when speaking of a creature's locomotion, however -pod is Greek and used for denoting the number of limbs (excluding wings) a creature has. Now, normally this isn't a problem, almost all tetrapods are quadrupeds...then come along aves and the homo genus, and in the case of e621, fantastical octopodal hexapeds. Oh my!

TL;DR: for consistency and accuracy, the tag hexapod needs to be switched to hexaped.
See: https://e621.net/wiki_pages/32227

Me and TheVileOne are responsible for the current system.

You are right - "hexapod" is greek, while the rest of the names are latin. But "hexaped" isn't latin. A latin name for a six-legged creature is "sexaped".
That's pretty much the only reason why we aren't using it.

bitwolfy said:
Me and TheVileOne are responsible for the current system.

You are right - "hexapod" is greek, while the rest of the names are latin. But "hexaped" isn't latin. A latin name for a six-legged creature is "sexaped".
That's pretty much the only reason why we aren't using it.

I see, I actually skimmed that old forum thread; however, the verbiage as used is patently incorrect. A hexapod is a member of Hexapoda - i.e. an insect. This is why I suggested the (horrible mashup of) hexaped.

[Edited because I can't type coherently right now]

cdpaliden said:
I see, I actually skimmed that old forum thread; however, the verbiage as used is patently incorrect. A hexapod is a member of Hexapoda - i.e. an insect. This is why I suggested the (horrible mashup of) hexaped.

[Edited because I can't type coherently right now]

The old system that stemmed from that thread used 6_legs. Yes, it went "legless, 1_leg, biped, 3_legs, quadruped, ???, 6_legs".
Which is really wrong, and encroaches on another system (multi_leg).

Now, if it were up to me, we'd get rid of multi_leg entirely, since by its very definition it inherently violates TWYS. Then, we could just use the *_leg tags, and wouldn't have to mash terms like this. But that's another discussion entirely.

bitwolfy said:
Now, if it were up to me, we'd get rid of multi_leg entirely, since by its very definition it inherently violates TWYS. Then, we could just use the *_leg tags, and wouldn't have to mash terms like this. But that's another discussion entirely.

This makes so much sense.

bitwolfy said:
Now, if it were up to me, we'd get rid of multi_leg entirely, since by its very definition it inherently violates TWYS.

How so? If you see a character has four legs, you tag it. That doesn't violate TWYS at all. If somebody's adding it to posts where you can't see a character's legs, then that's on the user, not the tag.

furrin_gok said:
How so? If you see a character has four legs, you tag it. That doesn't violate TWYS at all. If somebody's adding it to posts where you can't see a character's legs, then that's on the user, not the tag.

The definition of multi-leg is a character that has a different number of legs than normal for its species. You are not supposed to tag the number of legs if it's the same as standard.
That requires external information, which we are not supposed to use for tagging.

bitwolfy said:
The definition of multi-leg is a character that has a different number of legs than normal for its species. You are not supposed to tag the number of legs if it's the same as standard.
That requires external information, which we are not supposed to use for tagging.

I thought multi-leg was for characters with three or more legs. Looking at the wiki now, this is something that should be set to a Lore tag.