tag:danbooru.me,2005:/forum_topics/15168[REJECTED] Tag implication: short_twintails -> short_hair2018-05-27T23:22:35-04:00tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1473462018-05-27T23:22:35-04:002018-05-27T23:22:35-04:00@DanbooruBot: The tag implication short_twintails ->...<p>The tag implication <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> -> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair">short_hair</a> (<a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-forum-post-id-link" href="/forum_posts/145178">forum #145178</a>) has been rejected by <a href="/users?name=Hillside_Moose">@Hillside_Moose</a>.</p>DanbooruBot/users/502584tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1470502018-05-17T00:03:42-04:002018-05-17T00:03:42-04:00@DanbooruBot: This tag implication is pending automatic...<p>This tag implication is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.</p>DanbooruBot/users/502584tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1456192018-04-27T09:03:56-04:002018-04-27T09:03:56-04:00@yelite: > chinatsu said:
>
> It really isn't clear...<blockquote>
<p>chinatsu said:</p>
<p>It really isn't clear what you mean here. That two_side_up is a type of twintails or that they are mutally exclusive?</p>
</blockquote><p>mutally exclusive. I didn't know they already are.</p><blockquote><p>The concept is very clearly recognized in anime, with popular characters such as <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/yoshikawa_chinatsu">Yoshikawa Chinatsu</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/tanaka_mamimi">Tanaka Mamimi</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/kaname_madoka">Kaname Madoka</a> among others having the style. It doesn't have the problem of long twintails where the tagger is just looking to saturate a post with more tags that aren't useful, short twintails is actually very useful.</p></blockquote><p><strong>If</strong> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> is <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair">short hair</a> (after get rid of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> part), I didn't see how they're different with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-wiki-does-not-exist dtext-tag-empty" href="/wiki_pages/long_twin_tails" title="This wiki page does not have a tag">long twin tails</a> = 2-tags-combine case. I understand the tag might usefull because of the large result but isn't it the same with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-tag-empty" href="/wiki_pages/long_twintails" title="This wiki page does not have a tag">long twintails</a> and many other tags, which is nuked?</p><p>The special treament's only because of some <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/long_hair">long hair</a> posts like <em>two side up</em> (invalid now because of the seperated of twintails/two side up) and, maybe, posts like</p><blockquote><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2649323">post #2649323</a></p></blockquote><blockquote>
<p>chinatsu said:</p>
<p>It would be two_side_up, not twintails.</p>
</blockquote><p>I don't know if it's <em>short twintails</em> or not, but it is <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a>. All her hair is clearly tying into two locks.</p>yelite/users/521478tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1455152018-04-24T03:38:05-04:002018-04-24T03:38:05-04:00@chilled_sake: > yelite said:
>
> Personally, I would love to...<blockquote>
<p>yelite said:</p>
<p>Personally, I would love to seperated complelty <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two_side_up</a> with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a></p>
</blockquote><p>It really isn't clear what you mean here. That two_side_up is a type of twintails or that they are mutally exclusive?</p><blockquote><p>and get rid of this tag (see <a rel="external nofollow noreferrer" class="dtext-link dtext-external-link dtext-named-external-link" href="http://danbooru.me/forum_topics/14217">Long_twintails</a>).</p></blockquote><p>The concept is very clearly recognized in anime, with popular characters such as <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/yoshikawa_chinatsu">Yoshikawa Chinatsu</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/tanaka_mamimi">Tanaka Mamimi</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/kaname_madoka">Kaname Madoka</a> among others having the style. It doesn't have the problem of long twintails where the tagger is just looking to saturate a post with more tags that aren't useful, short twintails is actually very useful.</p><blockquote><ul><li>Are <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> mutually exclusive?<br>
</li></ul></blockquote><p>Yes, I think so.</p><blockquote><ul><li>Is it the same with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/side_ponytail">side ponytail</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/one_side_up">one side up</a>?</li></ul></blockquote><p>Yes.</p><blockquote><p>Put the <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> type aside, would <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2649323">post #2649323</a> be <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> with long hair?</p></blockquote><p>It would be two_side_up, not twintails.</p><blockquote>
<p>Laethiel said:</p>
<p>-1 to implication, due to <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/low_twintails">low_twintails</a> + <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a></p>
</blockquote><p>Can you cite some examples where it's actually the case such twintails are too long to be part of a head of short hair? It's not intuitive to me that there would be, plus after searching through <a class="dtext-link dtext-post-search-link" href="/posts?tags=short_twintails%20low_twintails">short_twintails low_twintails</a> I feel confirmed in that. Plus low twintails are in general shorter that most twintails just because they start lower, it really doesn't make a difference in how "short" twintails are whether they star at the top of the head or below the ears, they are still judged by their minima.</p><p>Also consider <a class="dtext-link dtext-post-search-link" href="/posts?tags=short_twintails%20-short_hair">short_twintails -short_hair</a>. Do you find posts here which would not be considered having short hair besides ones which were errantly tagged as either short_twintails to begin with? Often the tagger has either tagged below-shoulder-length hair as "short" twintails or should have used two_side_up.</p><blockquote><p>+1 to splitting <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two_side_up</a></p></blockquote><p>Well, this is already the case. I attempted maybe a year ago to create the opposite policy where two_side_up would be a subset of short_twintails but consensus looks to be that they are mutually exclusive.</p>chilled_sake/users/463832tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1454772018-04-23T09:08:14-04:002018-04-23T09:08:14-04:00@Laethiel: -1 to implication, due to low_twintails +...<p>-1 to implication, due to <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/low_twintails">low_twintails</a> + <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a></p><p>+1 to splitting <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two_side_up</a></p>Laethiel/users/40740tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1452812018-04-18T14:40:06-04:002018-04-18T14:40:06-04:00@user_525419: > yelite said:
>
> I would like to agree with...<blockquote>
<p>yelite said:</p>
<p>I would like to agree with you, but the wiki must be changed first before you want to do anything else with the tag.</p>
<p>*********<br><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> wiki is from 2009 while <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a>'s is 2011. In my understanding, <em>short twintails</em> is covering <em>two side up</em> with short locks because at the time there's no tag to describe this kind of hair style. In its first wiki, <em>two side up</em> is "a variant of twintails" (I didn't look at its wiki again till now) and the wiki of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> only mention they're seperated in the changing on 2017.</p>
<p>So pardon me for asking, </p>
<ul>
<li>Are <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> mutually exclusive?</li>
<li>Is it the same with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/side_ponytail">side ponytail</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/one_side_up">one side up</a>?</li>
</ul>
<p>*********</p>
<p>Put the <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> type aside, would <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2649323">post #2649323</a> be <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> with long hair?</p>
</blockquote><p>Answers to your questions:</p><p>1. Yes<br>2. Yes<br>3. Yes</p>user_525419/users/525419tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1452742018-04-18T09:05:30-04:002018-04-18T09:07:50-04:00@yelite: > chinatsu said:
>
> That wiki entry is just...<blockquote>
<p>chinatsu said:</p>
<p>That wiki entry is just wrong, that describes two side up</p>
</blockquote><p>I would like to agree with you, but the wiki must be changed first before you want to do anything else with the tag.</p><p>*********<br><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> wiki is from 2009 while <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a>'s is 2011. In my understanding, <em>short twintails</em> is covering <em>two side up</em> with short locks because at the time there's no tag to describe this kind of hair style. In its first wiki, <em>two side up</em> is "a variant of twintails" (I didn't look at its wiki again till now) and the wiki of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> only mention they're seperated in the changing on 2017.</p><p>So pardon me for asking, </p><ul>
<li>Are <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> mutually exclusive?</li>
<li>Is it the same with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/side_ponytail">side ponytail</a> and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/one_side_up">one side up</a>?</li>
</ul><p>*********</p><p>Put the <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two side up</a> type aside, would <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2649323">post #2649323</a> be <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> with long hair?</p>yelite/users/521478tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1452652018-04-18T02:24:45-04:002018-04-18T02:24:45-04:00@chilled_sake: > yelite said:
> Right in short_twintails...<blockquote><p>yelite said:<br>Right in <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> wiki:</p></blockquote><p>That wiki entry is just wrong, that describes two side up</p>chilled_sake/users/463832tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451892018-04-16T11:56:09-04:002018-04-16T12:06:57-04:00@user_525419: > yelite said:
>
> uhm, did you mistake short...<blockquote>
<p>yelite said:</p>
<p><s>uhm, did you mistake <em>short</em> and <em>low</em> part?</s> <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2867616">post #2867616</a> isn't <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> because</p>
<p>edit: didn't see you posted 2 examples. Anyhow, <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2987260">post #2987260</a> isn't either.</p>
</blockquote><p>Then I fear nothing counts as short twintails if this post doesn't fall under it. The two bunches of hair are relatively short to the overall hair length there. <br>There is a huge intersection between low and short twintails. </p>user_525419/users/525419tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451872018-04-16T07:00:14-04:002018-04-16T10:17:51-04:00@yelite: > Provence said:
>
> Replaced with post...<blockquote>
<p>Provence said:</p>
<p>Replaced with <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2987260">post #2987260</a>.<br><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2867616">post #2867616</a> (Q) should also fit and isn't <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/low_twintails">low twintails</a>.</p>
</blockquote><p><s>uhm, did you mistake <em>short</em> and <em>low</em> part?</s> <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2867616">post #2867616</a> isn't <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a> because</p><blockquote><p>If the locks of hair are longer and extend past the shoulders, they are simply to be tagged as twintails.</p></blockquote><p>edit: didn't see you posted 2 examples. Anyhow, <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2987260">post #2987260</a> isn't either.</p><p>***<br>Personally, I would love to seperated complelty <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two_side_up</a> with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/twintails">twintails</a> and get rid of this tag (see <a rel="external nofollow noreferrer" class="dtext-link dtext-external-link dtext-named-external-link" href="http://danbooru.me/forum_topics/14217">Long_twintails</a>).</p><p>Because the dicussion about <a rel="external nofollow noreferrer" class="dtext-link dtext-external-link dtext-named-external-link" href="http://danbooru.me/forum_topics/13497">(Short) Twintails vs. Two Side up</a>'s going nowhere, I think the example for long <em>short twintails</em> (<a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/345073">post #345073</a> (E)) still stand.</p>yelite/users/521478tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451842018-04-16T06:12:39-04:002018-04-16T06:16:17-04:00@user_525419: > worldendDominator said:
>
> That's actually...<blockquote>
<p>worldendDominator said:</p>
<p>That's actually <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two_side_up</a> and that example is wrong.</p>
</blockquote><p>Replaced with <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2987260">post #2987260</a>.<br><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2867616">post #2867616</a> (Q) should also fit and isn't <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/low_twintails">low twintails</a>. </p>user_525419/users/525419tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451832018-04-16T05:39:02-04:002018-04-16T05:39:02-04:00@worldendDominator: > yelite said:
>
> Right in short_twintails...<blockquote>
<p>yelite said:</p>
<p>Right in <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> wiki:</p>
</blockquote><p>That's actually <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/two_side_up">two_side_up</a> and that example is wrong.</p>worldendDominator/users/406536tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451812018-04-16T02:31:13-04:002018-04-16T02:31:48-04:00@yelite: > skylightcrystal said:
>
> -1 because of...<blockquote>
<p>skylightcrystal said:</p>
<p>-1 because of <a class="dtext-link dtext-post-search-link" href="/posts?tags=short_twintails%20short_hair_with_long_locks">short_twintails short_hair_with_long_locks</a></p>
<p>eg. <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2640037">post #2640037</a></p>
</blockquote><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2640037">post #2640037</a> shouldn't tag with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair_with_long_locks">short_hair_with_long_locks</a> (required unbound short hair). I didn't remove the tag 'cause if she lets her hair down, the difference between the lock of hair and the the rest of her hair is distinct enough (imo).</p><p>***</p><blockquote>
<p>chinatsu said:</p>
<p>create implication <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> -> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair">short_hair</a></p>
</blockquote><p>Right in <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> wiki:</p><blockquote>
<p>Characters with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/long_hair">long hair</a> can also wear <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a>.</p>
<ul><li>
<a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/345073">post #345073</a><br>
</li></ul>
</blockquote>yelite/users/521478tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451802018-04-16T02:19:13-04:002018-04-16T17:43:50-04:00@skylightcrystal: edit 2: on second thoughts, I was right to...<p>edit 2: on second thoughts, I was right to bring attention to the likes of <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/2640037">post #2640037</a> - either images like this should not be tagged with <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short twintails</a>, no matter how long the twintails are, or this implication should not go ahead, as these images certainly do not want the <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair">short hair</a> tag.</p><p>I would strongly prefer the latter, so still -1 to this implication.</p>skylightcrystal/users/557539tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/1451782018-04-16T02:03:28-04:002018-05-27T23:22:35-04:00@chilled_sake: create implication short_twintails ->...<p>create implication <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> -> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair">short_hair</a></p><p><a class="dtext-link" href="/tag_implications?search%5Bid%5D=8552">Link to implication</a></p><p>Makes sense</p><p>EDIT: This tag implication is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.</p><p>EDIT: The tag implication <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_twintails">short_twintails</a> -> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/short_hair">short_hair</a> (<a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-forum-post-id-link" href="/forum_posts/145178">forum #145178</a>) has been rejected by <a href="/users?name=Hillside_Moose">@Hillside_Moose</a>.</p>chilled_sake/users/463832