The tag alias #74776 living_insertion -> vore is pending approval.

Reason: Here's what the wiki for living_insertion says is the difference:
"While often conflated, living insertion is technically not vore - unlike vore, the goal of a living insertion isn't to fully consume the character; the insertion is oftentimes partial, and it's either implied or explicitly shown that the inserted being will exit from the same orifice."

First of all, that's not TWYS - the vast majority of posts under living_insertion have basically nothing showing that. Secondly, even in the cases where the character truly does exit unharmed - vore includes that! See full_tour, regurgitation vore, rebirth, and just safe_vore in general (though that tag also has issues, but it's certainly vore).

There was one previous thread on the matter, topic #18123. The one counterexample they gave could be tagged vore, and in cases where the insertion hasn't started yet that wouldn't be properly tagged living_insertion either.

I'm fairly certain this shouldn't be unanimous - there's quite a few wikis that explicitly attempt to differentiate the two, such as body_in_pussy. I still think it should go through, but ideally I'd like to see some counterarguments.

scth said:
I'm fairly certain this shouldn't be unanimous - there's quite a few wikis that explicitly attempt to differentiate the two, such as body_in_pussy. I still think it should go through, but ideally I'd like to see some counterarguments.

Looking at the roster i'm not surprised it's unanimous

scth said:
I'm fairly certain this shouldn't be unanimous - there's quite a few wikis that explicitly attempt to differentiate the two, such as body_in_pussy.

According to that wiki, body_in_pussy is for unbirthing (vore) and vaginal_birth (non-insertion and non-vore). If a character isn't being inserted into another character, living_insertion wouldn't apply, and if a character is being inserted into another, it's vore.

The only distinction I could see is something like cock_vore, a form of vore where a character isn't (necessarily) being inserted into another but becomes a part of them. But as the vast majority of vore is of the insertion kind, the two tags would largely return the same results. Any tag to distinguish them should indicate the less usual non-insertion types of vore rather than the usual insertion types.

watsit said:
According to that wiki, body_in_pussy is for unbirthing (vore) and vaginal_birth (non-insertion and non-vore). If a character isn't being inserted into another character, living_insertion wouldn't apply, and if a character is being inserted into another, it's vore.

I was specifically referring to the line "Note that not all posts depicting body in pussy should be tagged as unbirthing (e.g. a character is ridden as if they were a dildo)".

I can see where the wiki is coming from, trying to distinguish between "vore, the intent" and "vore, the action", which is really messy tag-wise on e6, to the point where things like infestation often get tagged as vore (of the parasites), because in here, vore is usually any situation where someone ends up inside-ish someone else.

I'd be in favor of leaving it as-is, in case we do manage to sort that out at some point in the future, but I'll admit the distinction is hard to justify right now.

scth said:
I was specifically referring to the line "Note that not all posts depicting body in pussy should be tagged as unbirthing (e.g. a character is ridden as if they were a dildo)".

I would say that counts as unbirthing (or really, vaginal_vore, which is aliased to unbirthing). A character going part way into another's mouth gets tagged as vore/oral_vore, I don't see why the same wouldn't be true for a character going part way into another's pussy.

watsit said:
I would say that counts as unbirthing (or really, vaginal_vore, which is aliased to unbirthing). A character going part way into another's mouth gets tagged as vore/oral_vore, I don't see why the same wouldn't be true for a character going part way into another's pussy.

I agree, of course, just was stating that clearly some people don't.

fifteen said:
I can see where the wiki is coming from, trying to distinguish between "vore, the intent" and "vore, the action", which is really messy tag-wise on e6, to the point where things like infestation often get tagged as vore (of the parasites), because in here, vore is usually any situation where someone ends up inside-ish someone else.

I'd be in favor of leaving it as-is, in case we do manage to sort that out at some point in the future, but I'll admit the distinction is hard to justify right now.

Sure, the distinction would be the intent. I don't think that's something that can ever be TWYS, though.

scth said:
I'm fairly certain this shouldn't be unanimous - there's quite a few wikis that explicitly attempt to differentiate the two, such as body_in_pussy. I still think it should go through, but ideally I'd like to see some counterarguments.

Honestly vore related tags can be a bit messy here (object vore related things? OH BOY), but I think this proposal works, pretty much everything I saw tagged with it is just "ongoing vore" which is somewhat covered by "partially_inside".