Genjar said:
Here's my reasoning for pruning down the latest Gangbang edit. The addition was:

It is tagged for all types of gangbangs, and there's nothing that suggests otherwise. Gang_rape is already listed in related tags, and it implies gangbang. Therefore, the first line is redundant.

:/ Ok, let's sort this out:

Should we not bother to summarize immediately-related tags in the main tag for it, then?

Like breasts.

I thought the point of the wiki was maximum info accessibility at a glance, with the least amount of effort required. Especially since it's already been established that people seldom check the wiki articles (or show signs of it) as is

Should that be done differently?

-

Happy_sex almost never applies to gangbangs. Those tend to be solo_focus, which excludes happy_sex.

The very first example listed in the gangbang wiki is an example of happy sex

Unless you're saying that solo_focus etc. pictures can't count as happy sex because the other participants' faces are ususally obscured, to which I ask:

Why?
If someone is happy while having sex, and the other partners' emotional states are ambiguous, why wouldn't happy_sex count?

should there a specific tag for mutual happy_sex?

Less than 0.5% of gangbangs are tagged as happy_sex. Only listing tags that are actually related seems like a good guideline.

See above

-

Fucked_silly and looking_pleasured are a bit more common, but I dunno if either is common enough. I kept those in the related tags anyway.

Nothing really new to say about this that wasn't covered above

-

And the tags related to gang_rape should be listed in the gang_rape entry, not in gangbang.

There isn't even a gang_rape wiki article. If someone wanted to know about how the tags related to gangbang are used, why would they look there first?