I was tagging a picture today and was wondering what kind of piercing this is. For those of you who don't want to click that link for whatever reason, it's basically a small stud below the bottom lip.

Turns out it's a labret_piercing, but for whatever reason this specific type of piercing has been aliased to simply lip_piercing. Honestly I don't know why this is an alias and not an implication? It's a very specific piercing that deserves to be its own tag imo.

https://e621.net/forum/show/172657

Blind_Guardian said:
https://e621.net/forum/show/172657

Ok...so? I already know it was aliased, I just don't agree that it should be aliased. If there is possible confusion as to the exact meaning of the piercing we can just define it better on the wiki. It's just super dumb that there is a specific type of piercing that is untaggable because it's been aliased to the more general term.

Also I noticed while going through the snakebite_piercing that people have been confusing it for frenum_piercing and frenum_ladder...somebody should probably go correct that. See? Even fairly well-known piercings can get confused sometimes...doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and alias them away.

Dyrone said:
Ok...so? I already know it was aliased, I just don't agree that it should be aliased. If there is possible confusion as to the exact meaning of the piercing we can just define it better on the wiki. It's just super dumb that there is a specific type of piercing that is untaggable because it's been aliased to the more general term.

Also I noticed while going through the snakebite_piercing that people have been confusing it for frenum_piercing and frenum_ladder...somebody should probably go correct that. See? Even fairly well-known piercings can get confused sometimes...doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and alias them away.

From what I took of the discussion when it was aliased was that labret can be used for more than just the soul patch type piercing below the bottom lip. I should have added my thoughts to my original post. I don't agree with aliasing it away and would personally want it undone. I'm not sure I ever saw it tagged for anything other than the common usage. Tagging piercings is on my todo list but it's a lot of work since you can't use thumbnails reliably... and there's just under 100,000 posts containing a piercing. I'll try and clean up some of the smaller tags when I have time.

From my 5 minutes of googling it seems like most people use “labret piercing” to refer to the type of piercing you linked so I would support dealiasing it. No idea how to do that though

According to wikipedia a nickname for it is a “Mao”. I have no idea how widespread or accurate this is because I couldn’t find anyone refering to the piercing as this online, but incase labret_piercing doesn’t get dealiased maybe creating a tag based on this could work instead.

SharkFetish said:
No idea how to do that though

Only mods/admins can alias/de-alias stuff.

Dyrone said:
Ok...so? I already know it was aliased, I just don't agree that it should be aliased. If there is possible confusion as to the exact meaning of the piercing we can just define it better on the wiki. It's just super dumb that there is a specific type of piercing that is untaggable because it's been aliased to the more general term.

That other thread isn't locked, you could have simply popped over there and discussed it.

Blind_Guardian said:
I don't agree with aliasing it away and would personally want it undone.

SharkFetish said:
From my 5 minutes of googling it seems like most people use “labret piercing” to refer to the type of piercing you linked so I would support dealiasing it.

My people.

Blind_Guardian said:
I'll try and clean up some of the smaller tags when I have time.

Thanks, I can try to work on it too...I just figured there might be those out there with more robust tagging tools that might be able to do it faster than a pleb like me.

Furrin_Gok said:
That other thread isn't locked, you could have simply popped over there and discussed it.

I supposed I could have.