I don't know how serious e621 is about tagging images with years, but I'm just going to throw out my two-cents on the matter.

I see a lot of users tagging images with the current year:

-Without knowing a source or it's origin date.
-When the source says otherwise.
-When an artist is uploading past works. (Mistaking reuploads for new works.)

Off the top of my head:
https://e621.net/post_tag_history/index?post_id=675379 (Sourceless image tagged 2015, actually from 2013. If you don't know, don't tag it.)
https://e621.net/post_tag_history/index?post_id=604725 (Tagged 2015 when source says 2012. Uploader gave the source upon posting, so no excuse there.)

I personally think an image should not be tagged with a year unless it's signed on the image itself, or if it can be confirmed as a new/recent work.

It's nice to have years as tags so someone can see an artist's progression, but there it not much point in tagging something with a year if it's wrong.

I only tag the year if I see it on the image

Mostly tag only it if visible but rarely if obvious at source, e.g. don't tag things where source says "Made this [IN SOME DIFFUSE PAST MOST LIKELY IN THIS OR THE PREVIOUS DECADE] and decided to finally show you guys, now look at it!"

I just tag the year of when the post was uploaded by the artist(like on "© 2015 Artist" )

Neither of those mistags have anything to with any sort of tagging policy. Just unspeakably lazy taggers. It happens.

If you have evidence to the contrary, feel free to change the year. I just tag based on the current year, since I upload directly from FA so everything is assumed to be new unless otherwise stated in the description.

If you find that anyone is doing this excessively and don't feel like discussing it with them, feel free to send me a PM (preferably with a couple examples of mistags) and I'll take care of it.

In the absence of a date written on the image, tagging an image with the year of the upload date is often correct. If cases where it is not (artist uploading older works or migrating galleries), it's an honest mistake and I can understand that.

I mostly take issue on the subject when people indiscriminately tag "2015", with or without even providing a source or artist name. (As in the OP examples, for which I made the blunders more clear).

People make mistakes. That is understandable. Though there are some mistakes for which I cannot see a reason why they occur:

post #535191 post #535189

Tagged 2005 and 2006, respectively. Both images are signed "'03".

Maybe 2003 was when they were drawn, but 2005 and 2006 was when they were colored and uploaded.
Maybe the one who tagged them as such knows something we don't.

Regardless, I say whatever is written on the image should take precedence because it's an absolute as insisted upon by the artist. If not written on the image, then go with the earliest instance of the image's public posting (preferably in an artist's gallery) and take the description into consideration.

On that note: FurAffinity source for post #535191 says "© 2014", but clearly this is an case where the artist is uploading older works, so that cannot be correct. An example of how you cannot always just trust what the source says (but is better than nothing unless evidence says otherwise).

idunno. I sometimes feel like maybe I'm the among the few people who actually give a damn, and among the even fewer who 'sperg out about it to the point where some may view me as an antagonist of some sort. "OMG who cares? Just enjoy the pr0n." etc.

Thank you for your input.

I use it sometimes to help trace image sources, so I definitely appreciate those who put the effort in to tag the year. :)

I'm tagging year tags only on pics that have valid source. I hope I didn't mistag any pic because reupload, but I upload many pics from pixiv and I don't know a single word in japanese so...

BTW I remember at least one case on e621 when year signed on the image was in future. Probably because of artist mistake or maybe trolling.

yeah you also have to make sure that the dates that are signed on artwork make sense; like five nights at Freddie's fanart signed 2010

Granberia said:

BTW I remember at least one case on e621 when year signed on the image was in future. Probably because of artist mistake or maybe trolling.

post #555100