Aliasing artistic_nudity → tasteful_nudity
Link to alias

Reason:

The tag artistic_nude is already aliased to tasteful_nudity, so I figured it would make sense to alias artistic_nudity too. Currently there's only 1 post with this tag, but I feel it is quite likely that others may add the artistic_nudity tag to other posts in the future, especially considering the increasing amount of *_nudity tags.

EDIT: The tag alias artistic_nudity -> tasteful_nudity (forum #209348) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

Personally, I would remove both tags because they're too subjective. What is "tasteful" to one person may not be tasteful to another.

Plus one for invalidation, for the same reason: tasteful_nudity is too subjective. And it suggests that regular nudity is somehow tasteless. Pshaw.

Genjar said:
Plus one for invalidation, for the same reason: tasteful_nudity is too subjective. And it suggests that regular nudity is somehow tasteless. Pshaw.

wouldnt aliasing to nude be better?

Mutisija said:
wouldnt aliasing to nude be better?

No, because it's often tagged for characters who are only partially nude.

Tasteful_nudity got implicated to nude last year. Which was a mistake that's led to numerous mistags. See tasteful_nudity clothes. ...and that's after many attempts of trying to clean it up.

Posts such as these are currently tagged as nude because of that:
post #242814 post #14015 post #947248

I'd rather get rid of both tags. More often than not, I find myself removing them from posts where they don't apply rather than adding them to posts where they do.

It looks like there's some confusion in the collective wiki content of all of those. Why does casual_nudity say "for no apparent reason?" There might be a very apparent reason of nudism or being at a nude_beach or something like that. And yeah, +1 to the notion that "tasteful" is really subjective. What about generalizing the entire bunch to something pretty obvious like non-sexual_nudity or something?

Seems pretty cut-and-dry. Are they masturbating? Having sex? On a stripper pole? Spreading their legs at the camera? If not, well, there you go. Definitely far less subjective than "cute."

Which are you saying is clear? The suggestion I made or one/all of the existing ones?

Delian said:
Personally, I would remove both tags because they're too subjective. What is "tasteful" to one person may not be tasteful to another.

Genjar said:
Plus one for invalidation, for the same reason: tasteful_nudity is too subjective. And it suggests that regular nudity is somehow tasteless. Pshaw.

In addition to tasteful_nudity often being mistagged on posts depicting sexual nudity and partial nudity, tasteful_nudity and artistic_nudity are indeed rather subjective and are too similar to the somewhat less subjective casual_nudity tag. It does seem like a better idea to get rid of the tasteful_nudity and artistic_nudity tags, but how? Should they be invalidated, aliased to casual_nudity, or as Notnobody suggested...

notnobody said:
It looks like there's some confusion in the collective wiki content of all of those. Why does casual_nudity say "for no apparent reason?" There might be a very apparent reason of nudism or being at a nude_beach or something like that. And yeah, +1 to the notion that "tasteful" is really subjective. What about generalizing the entire bunch to something pretty obvious like non-sexual_nudity or something?

... combine these tags into a different tag? Additionally, if this non-sexual_nudity tag or some variation of it is used, then which tags should be aliased to it? Should it only be the artistic_nudity and tasteful_nudity tags, or should other tags like casual_nudity and nudism be aliased too?

Also, sorry for the "no apparent reason" bit in the casual_nudity wiki. I was trying to convey that the characters didn't need a reason in order to be nude. I'll need to fix that entry soon, that is if we all don't decide to invalidate the tag.

Genjar said:
No, because it's often tagged for characters who are only partially nude.

Tasteful_nudity got implicated to nude last year. Which was a mistake that's led to numerous mistags. See tasteful_nudity clothes. ...and that's after many attempts of trying to clean it up.

Posts such as these are currently tagged as nude because of that:
post #242814 post #14015 post #947248

The mistagging of partially clothed characters as nude is quite problematic, but we should make sure that whatever tags replace these current problem-maker tags doesn't repeat this mistake. If they're aliased to casual_nudity, we may need to have a similar tag for partially clothed characters in non-sexual situations so that such posts don't get mistagged as nude again.

As for the TL;DR!

artistic_nudity and tasteful_nudity are making too many problems and have got to go. But should we invalidate these tags, alias them to a similar tag (i.e. casual_nudity), or replace several of these nudity-based tags with a less subjective set of tags?

I think "artistic" just generally sounds meaningless in the context, and "tasteful" is +1 to too subjective to exist, even though the meaning seems clear. I'd alias that, artistic, and casual all directly to some generic thing like I suggested, and then let nudism, which is its own thing, imply it but sit alongside it too. RL nudists usually use the term "social nudity," but that wouldn't be appropriate here because it would be a catch-all for more than just social situations.

For the partial versus full nudity point, I think you're just over-interpreting. If there's a pic where everybody in a sort of zenra type way just goes around bottomless and seems to consider that a ubiquitous social norm, that's non-sexual nudity, even if it isn't full nudity. Tagging that would nude would be a mistake no matter what the wording of the other tags was. It wouldn't make sense to make like casual_partial_nudity when casual_nudity already includes that.

notnobody said:
I think "artistic" just generally sounds meaningless in the context, and "tasteful" is +1 to too subjective to exist, even though the meaning seems clear. I'd alias that, artistic, and casual all directly to some generic thing like I suggested, and then let nudism, which is its own thing, imply it but sit alongside it too. RL nudists usually use the term "social nudity," but that wouldn't be appropriate here because it would be a catch-all for more than just social situations.

For the partial versus full nudity point, I think you're just over-interpreting. If there's a pic where everybody in a sort of zenra type way just goes around bottomless and seems to consider that a ubiquitous social norm, that's non-sexual nudity, even if it isn't full nudity. Tagging that would nude would be a mistake no matter what the wording of the other tags was. It wouldn't make sense to make like casual_partial_nudity when casual_nudity already includes that.

Are you sure? Cause social_nudity sounds like a pretty good tag to use for non-sexual nudity, other than casual_nudity perhaps.

As for a tag that can describe partial non-sexual nudity ... casual_unclothed ...? ... or use social_partial as a complimentary tag to social_nudity? ... maybe? I'm not sure, I don't have too many ideas that seem all that good, but I hope someone out there can think of a better and more simplistic tag that can describe partial-nudity in a social situation without implicating the nude tag... someday...

social_nudity would be... too abstract.
Imagine that can be a tag for female characters without a hat..or with exposed calves *hides under a mantlet shield, expecting rotten fruits

Then we'd have social_nudity and public_nudity... No, those would get mixed up. I'm not entirely sure myself what the exact difference would be.

Not sure about what's the difference between casual_nudity and public_nudity, either. Can the former also be tagged as public_nudity, or is public_nudity only for improper public nudity...?

Urgh. No, let's just start untangling this by getting rid of tasteful_nudity first.

I agree, the tasteful_nudity tag has been much too subjective, frequently missused, and can generally be encompassed by the casual_nudity tag, so we might as well get rid of it. I guess the question is whether tasteful_nudity should be aliased or outright invalidated.

After looking through the wiki, I think it may be best to invalidate tasteful_nudity, along with artistic_nudity and artistic_nude.

Here's what I think the distinction is that's worth preserving, and only two tags are needed in total for it, whatever specific wording they have.

1.) Full or partial public nudity that's intentionally sexualized, be it like flashing or exhibitionism or humiliation or part of public_sex or whatever. public_nudity is common on tagged image sites like this and it's in a lot of real world laws, and it makes sense. Everyone understands it to mean a level of not normally socially acceptable nudity in some public setting. I think we're already good on this one.

2.) Full or partial nudity that isn't sexual, like familial nobody-cares-we're-related-now-shut-up-and-get-in-the-bath nudity, or nude models, or nude beaches, or nudist resorts, or skinny dipping, or just - I guess I'm stuck on the term zenra, like they're nude but society sort of dictates they don't take any notice of it. It's exposure of bodies in ways that in the real world would be considered to be clothed below the level of generally accepted decency, but without a visible air of obvious indecency or concern with it. That would encompass all of these other tags we're talking about, because it all shares the same feel. I'd say it wouldn't necessarily even have to be public, because say you had a picture of like a slumber party with nobody wearing bottoms - it still treats nudity in that same umbrella way, and that treatment is really what you're tagging.

So I think we're just missing one thing to condense some others into. Social would be a reasonable word for both active socialization and societal norms, to cover like half of the non-sexual applicable, but I think models and maybe like non-sexualized medical scenes or something, that would be more incidental and still non-sexual but clearly not social in a meaningful way. Maybe the way around that is that there's social and then there's incidental, for three total, showing just-because, because-social-dictates-or-situation, and because-sex.

For the most part this seems good, I just have some questions about implementation:

Would public_nudity cover only sexualized public nudity, or would it also cover non-sexualized depictions of public nudity? Nudity in a public setting is still public nudity, regardless of whether it's sexual or non-sexual.

I'm not entirely sure that an incidental_nudity tag would be a good idea. Primarily because I can easily see such a tag going down a similar route as tasteful_nudity did. I feel that such a tag seems rather open-ended in how it could be used, and just in wording alone could be mistakenly added to posts featuring accidental exposure or for scenes depicting streaking.

I'd be fine with partial and full nudity being applied to each of these new tags, but I'm unsure about whether everyone else would feel the same. Like Genjar pointed out, this can cause the nude tag to be applied to post depicting only partial nudity. Though a simple system, such application can result in many mistagged posts.

Other than that, I think that a two-tag system may be all that's needed, the main problem is finding a simple and clearly-worded pair of tags for sexual_nudity and non_sexual_nudity.

public_nudity as a term tends to be used all over the place pretty consistently to mean sexualized specifically. And tends to always be inclusive of full and partial nudity. The word nudity doesn't imply that it's total, in the tags or just in English in general. So if someone misuses the nude tag on a picture of a character who's just bottomless, that's clearly just entirely their mistaken usage, and if the reason they did it is because the word nudity appeared in one of the tags, then that's just completely insane.

Implications-wise, I guess it just depends on how wide a net you're casting with each term. Probably non-sexual_nudity is too wide, because a solo character in the shower would fall into that category but totally not be what we're talking about. And yeah like you said, a congregation at a nudist colony would clearly be public nudity, but not in the way the term's generally used.

Maybe in the end it makes more sense not to try and have two flavors of the tag, but to just tag the individual components that mean anything. Tag exhibitionism or public_sex or flashing for what they are, tag nudist or nude_beach or whatever when they're there, and characters that are nude or mostly_nude or partially_nude can be tagged as such. And if any or all of those states of undress appear in public, then tag it as such. There's no harm or lack of clarity in searching like "~nude ~partially_nude public casual" or "~nude ~partially_nude public" to specifically point out what you want.

The tag alias artistic_nudity -> tasteful_nudity (forum #209348) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.