As someone with a fursona of a specific breed of domestic sheep, I'm dismayed to find that the vast majority of images with the species tag for this breed are not consistent with the breed standards. Worse, many of them are recognizably an entirely different breed, some of which do not have existing species tags. Others with the tag are not even sheep. I'm willing to work on the tags myself, like identifying some of the specific breeds involved, but wanted to ask if there was a way to correct some of the more obvious groups of mistagged images (e.g. specific character tags having the wrong species tag) rather than just manually submitting tag updates to over a hundred images?

IIRC there is some tagging tool that makes the process a bit quicker, but beyond that not really. You can set up quick tags from your advanced settings, that allow adding and removing specific tags with one click, which will make the process significantly easier and faster (so add all tags that you will be adding or removing in the project).

Which tag?

Something about species/breed tags is that they are, largely, based on the word of the artist. If an artist draws a sheep with the face and ears of a goat and four horns and calls it a jacob? It's correctly tagged as jacob_sheep. A kitten face with bunny ears? If the artist calls it a jacob sheep that's what it is.

It is very, very hard to apply strict breed (or speecies) conformation while also accommodating different styles and levels of knowledge. How do you kick these out of jacob_sheep without also eliminating most posts in most species tags?
post #3571390post #3238576post #5543006

I agree with regsmutt. Species tags are almost comparable to lore tags in this sense. I don't have an issue with this, but there's several times where I've seen a "cat" and thought "That is definitely just a dog..." Sometimes furry anatomy can be weird or vague, sometimes art styles make things less clear. It is what it is.

emionix said:
I agree with regsmutt. Species tags are almost comparable to lore tags in this sense.

Species tags are explicitly TWYK (except where conflicting information is present):

tag what you see:
Tags in the Character and Species categories are partially dependent upon TWYS: that is, external information can be used to help identify what character or species is supposed to be depicted in the post in cases where it isn't obvious, but it cannot actively conflict with what is seen in the post.

donovan_dmc said:
Species tags are explicitly TWYK (except where conflicting information is present):

Looking at both the wiki and help sections on species tagging I'd argue that they're not explicitly TWYK. Wording such as "can be used to" contradict explicitness. The help section on tagging doesn't seem to touch on this subject at all. If explicitness is intended the wiki and help sections could probably do with some rewriting to that end.

sylenial said:
Looking at both the wiki and help sections on species tagging I'd argue that they're not explicitly TWYK. Wording such as "can be used to" contradict explicitness. The help section on tagging doesn't seem to touch on this subject at all. If explicitness is intended the wiki and help sections could probably do with some rewriting to that end.

There's some restrictions- you can't tag a photorealistic cow as a duck, even if said cow is actually in lore a magic shape-shifting duck. But beyond stuff like that there is a LOT of flexibility in order to accommodate wide variations in style, stereotypical/symbolic depictions that don't actually look like the animal (e.g. Mickey Mouse) as well as hybrids. It's blurry and difficult to put into words but, generally, if the artist says it's xyz species and it looks at least vaguely like the idea of it then it's likely fine.

sylenial said:
Looking at both the wiki and help sections on species tagging I'd argue that they're not explicitly TWYK. Wording such as "can be used to" contradict explicitness. The help section on tagging doesn't seem to touch on this subject at all. If explicitness is intended the wiki and help sections could probably do with some rewriting to that end.

Tags in the Character and Species categories are partially dependent upon TWYS

Note how it says partially dependent on TWYS, not the other way around
This implies that TWYK is the majority while TWYS is the minority

donovan_dmc said:
Note how it says partially dependent on TWYS, not the other way around
This implies that TWYK is the majority while TWYS is the minority

I'd argue that the part you highlighted, "partially dependent upon TWYS", is inaccurate and that it should state "partially dependent upon TWYK". The description as a whole implies that TWYK can be used if TWYS proves insufficient for accuracy (better to have a species tag then no tag), which makes it unique from most tags, but it explicitly states that TWYS takes priority ("cannot conflict with what is seen").

This is why I'm saying the description may need to be reworded if the desire is to state that species tags are explicitly TWYK, because it's currently not explicit. "Tag What You Know" isn't even defined anywhere that I can find, so it objectively can't be explicit right now.

All of this is as far as my interpretation of the description goes, in any case. :)