I was doing some tag cleanup when I came across post #5588418. We don't use the tag doughnut for puffy anuses, so I was going to remove it. That's when I realized that the character's cutie mark is a donut. Should I leave the donut tag as is, or remove it? Do we tag objects inside cutie marks? Thanks in advance. :)

munchmallow-frosty said:
I was doing some tag cleanup when I came across post #5588418. We don't use the tag doughnut for puffy anuses, so I was going to remove it. That's when I realized that the character's cutie mark is a donut. Should I leave the donut tag as is, or remove it? Do we tag objects inside cutie marks? Thanks in advance. :)

I would remove it, since it's not an actual donut in the art

munchmallow-frosty said:
I was doing some tag cleanup when I came across post #5588418. We don't use the tag doughnut for puffy anuses, so I was going to remove it. That's when I realized that the character's cutie mark is a donut. Should I leave the donut tag as is, or remove it? Do we tag objects inside cutie marks? Thanks in advance. :)

Leave as is. We do tag it regardless of if it is actual edible food or not, even a framed picture of a doughtnut is still tagged with doughnut.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Leave as is. We do tag it regardless of if it is actual edible food or not, even a framed picture of a doughtnut is still tagged with doughnut.

I was thinking about that, and made me think about the inception of drawings inside of drawings

I did notice that most of the x_cutie_mark tags have been aliased away, so that made me wonder whether or not to tag objects shown in cutie marks, but I think there's enough of an argument here to leave the tag as is. Therefore, I'll do just that.

nin10dope said:
I was thinking about that, and made me think about the inception of drawings inside of drawings

Objects within scenes are tagged regardless of how they appear, but careful consideration should be implemented with practicality in mind (i.e., "Do people searching for this expect to see this?").

For example, an artist plastered a small watermark that features their canine character/mascot on every upload they make, would you in turn tag canine on every post that has that watermark (even though the picture as a whole does not feature any canines)?

thegreatwolfgang said:
Objects within scenes are tagged regardless of how they appear, but careful consideration should be implemented with practicality in mind (i.e., "Do people searching for this expect to see this?").

For example, an artist plastered a small watermark that features their canine character/mascot on every upload they make, would you in turn tag canine on every post that has that watermark (even though the picture as a whole does not feature any canines)?

Except the image as a whole does feature canine, if it's in their visible watermark. Just because it's not the main focus of the image doesn't mean it shouldn't be tagged (barely_visible_x tags imply x, characters are still tagged even if they're in the background, etc). If a watermark has a penis or breasts in it, it should definitely still be tagged so peoples' blacklist and searches work, and I don't see why it should be any different for a canine character that people may want to blacklist or search for (e.g. if someone wants to actually look for some watermark, they should be able to search for the things it contains like anything else in an image).

watsit said:
Except the image as a whole does feature canine, if it's in their visible watermark. Just because it's not the main focus of the image doesn't mean it shouldn't be tagged (barely_visible_x tags imply x, characters are still tagged even if they're in the background, etc). If a watermark has a penis or breasts in it, it should definitely still be tagged so peoples' blacklist and searches work, and I don't see why it should be any different for a canine character that people may want to blacklist or search for (e.g. if someone wants to actually look for some watermark, they should be able to search for the things it contains like anything else in an image).

They could simply blacklist the artist to be honest. I wouldn't go as far as tagging gender or characteristics (e.g., blue_body, translucent_body, etc.) for the watermarks even though it is visually accurate.
Otherwise, their whole gallery would be tagged with the same set of barely relevant tags that would pollute search results.