That tag explicitly refers to two very different things. Nasty, sharp fangs as in post #579645 and post #584437, and "fangs of cute" as in post #595256 and post #568160. I've started using "cute fangs" without fangs for the latter case. Any thoughts?

I can kinda see the point. If people think we should keep it, then I'm fine with implicating cute_fangs to --> fangs, but either way they should still be tagged with fangs regardless if they're short and less serious looking.

How about additionally using sharp_teeth tag for former?

BTW shouldn't fangs imply teeth?

Granberia said:
How about additionally using sharp_teeth tag for former?

BTW shouldn't fangs imply teeth?

I'm not sure we want cute_fangs to be implied to sharp_teeth (I personally wouldn't use sharp_teeth for just a pair of fangs anyway).

Also teeth is an invalid tag. That's why :p

Circeus said:
I'm not sure we want cute_fangs to be implied to sharp_teeth (I personally wouldn't use sharp_teeth for just a pair of fangs anyway).

Also teeth is an invalid tag. That's why :p

I mean why don't tag pictures with sharp fangs with sharp_teeth fangs and pictures with cute fangs with just fangs?

Teeth is valid tag. It's not aliased to invalid_tag and has several other tags aliased/implied to it.

Granberia said:
I mean why don't tag pictures with sharp fangs with sharp_teeth fangs and pictures with cute fangs with just fangs?

Because we established earlier that sharp_teeth should only be tagged if there's actually a bunch of sharp teeth visible, not just a fang or two.