The bulk update request #6346 is active.

remove implication cyanotic_epithelium (790) -> blue_insides (3089)

Reason: Assuming there's even a good reason for this tag to still exist (I'd argue there's not, really), the description clearly states that it applies to blue or purple, so automatically tagging blue_insides on every use of it means it's going to get overapplied. Also, I'm seeing it used on teal parts as well, and I'm not even sure if that's proper or not (another reason this maybe shouldn't be a tag).

EDIT: The bulk update request #6346 (forum #388672) has been approved by @slyroon.

yeah this should probably be cleaned up and then aliased away to blue_insides.

Cyanosis is specifically skin turning blue in a non-blue organism, from lack of oxygen. So cyanotic isn't even the right word.

we should probably have <color>_epithelium tags.

sipothac said:
we should probably have <color>_epithelium tags.

The epithelium includes the skin as well, I think insides works well enough for our purposes.

sipothac said:
we should probably have <color>_epithelium tags.

We absolutely should not have ANY tags that have the word "epithelium" in them.

errorist said:
The bulk update request #6346 is active.

remove implication cyanotic_epithelium (790) -> blue_insides (3089)

Reason: Assuming there's even a good reason for this tag to still exist (I'd argue there's not, really), the description clearly states that it applies to blue or purple, so automatically tagging blue_insides on every use of it means it's going to get overapplied. Also, I'm seeing it used on teal parts as well, and I'm not even sure if that's proper or not (another reason this maybe shouldn't be a tag).

It goes without saying that purple is not blue, true. Cyanotic_epithelium is a far stretch from calling purple blue.

rainbow_dash said:
It goes without saying that purple is not blue, true. Cyanotic_epithelium is a far stretch from calling purple blue.

the tag's wiki says "with a blue or violet color".

sipothac said:
the tag's wiki says "with a blue or violet color".

The tag itself is cryptic and nearly unusable on its own.

arrow189 said:
Cyanosis is specifically skin turning blue in a non-blue organism, from lack of oxygen. So cyanotic isn't even the right word.

This seems to be the case. If you Google cyanotic even with quotation marks, you still get only results for cyanosis or oxygen-starved cells turning blue-purple. And the epithelium includes what we would tag skin, but this tag's wiki incredibly glosses over that fact, like so many bad wikis that want a specific vision that inconveniently does not fit the chosen tag name. Just bad planning. What's more, cyanosis is also a tag we have.

I really do not think "cyanotic" as a word means "the color cyan/blue." I think it is strictly for cyanosis, tissues changing color away from their healthy color to blue-purple.

pleaseletmein said:
yeah this should probably be cleaned up and then aliased away to blue_insides.

cyanotic_epithelium asphyxiation has no results. Looks like no one has "confused" it for what it actually is, which is the height of irony.

pleaseletmein said:
I think insides works well enough for our purposes.

I find this very questionable as well. The entire logic of the insides tags is off. We should tag a character's orifice colors with a single tag if the orifices are all the same color. Does that mean the character has "[color]_insides" though? If a character has a green mouth, vagina, anus, nostrils, etc does that mean they also have green intestines, heart, lungs, etc and imply they have green blood too? Because that's what I get from green_insides, and I doubt artists and character owners actually abide by or want that. The insides tags include the internal organs in their copy-pasted wikis, but I don't think that's an intended interpretation for most of these characters. They just aren't planned to that level.

The other problem with the entire range of the insides tags is these are usually highlighting colors that also include the orifices. The characters with these "insides" also have insides-colored noses, penises, nipples, pawpads, horns, hair maybe, etc. "Insides" is a poor description for what is actually going on.

abadbird said:
I find this very questionable as well. The entire logic of the insides tags is off. We should tag a character's orifice colors with a single tag if the orifices are all the same color. Does that mean the character has "[color]_insides" though? If a character has a green mouth, vagina, anus, nostrils, etc does that mean they also have green intestines, heart, lungs, etc and imply they have green blood too? Because that's what I get from green_insides, and I doubt artists and character owners actually abide by or want that. The insides tags include the internal organs in their copy-pasted wikis, but I don't think that's an intended interpretation for most of these characters. They just aren't planned to that level.

The other problem with the entire range of the insides tags is these are usually highlighting colors that also include the orifices. The characters with these "insides" also have insides-colored noses, penises, nipples, pawpads, horns, hair maybe, etc. "Insides" is a poor description for what is actually going on.

this is kinda why I've been leaning toward changing the terminology to something like <quality>_epithelium, although using that also poses a problem since normal skin would also fall under epithelium.

also, <quality>_insides, to me, always felt seem like it'd more be be meant for gore and internals; stuff which should probably have its own tags like <quality>_guts for organs and <quality>_flesh for muscle tisue.

I think the word epithelium is way too unclear, but I like the concept.
I realized as of reading this thread that I've had the meanings of the [color]_internal and [color]_insides tags reversed. The term "internals" is commonly used in character sheets to refer to the inner mouth, vagina, anus, gore, etc, whereas "insides" colloquially refers to inner abdominal organs.

The bulk update request #6346 (forum #388672) has been approved by @slyroon.