The tag alias #66193 colored-in -> colored has been rejected.

Reason: I think these are the same thing? Colored-in says it's for "color within the lines" but that seems like an odd distinction.

EDIT: The tag alias colored-in -> colored (forum #390000) has been rejected by @dsco.

I was told multiple times that the colored tag is defunct because it is too vague and very misused.

Colored isn’t supposed to be for any post with color, but specifically for posts that are the colored version of a post without color.
I made colored-in version to try to make a clearer tag, I suggest you go check it’s wiki.

dimoretpinel said:
Colored isn’t supposed to be for any post with color, but specifically for posts that are the colored version of a post without color.

Which itself is a dubious distinction, as we don't tag the "version" of a post set (given that the difference can be literally anything the artist can think of, and would be a logistical nightmare; e.g. a colored version of a post without color or an uncolored version of a post with color, multiple colored with multiple uncolored, character differences, gender differences, genital differences, precum differences, cum differences, 'lots of cum' differences, character count differences, sketch/lineart/colored lineart/lineless/partially colored/fully colored, etc; it would essentially duplicate almost every tag). It's better to just tag what's in a given image, rather than tagging what is or isn't in a given image relative to another (which is against TWYS; some leeway given to certain types of third-party_edits, since it's a third-part alteration and better to clarify something wasn't done by the original tagged artist).

Either this alias is valid, or both should be invalidated due to most posts being colored.

topic #36742
Redefine of preserve the colored tag

topic #37439
Invalidate colored

topic #40257
Implication flat colors -­> colored

topic #40266
Implication colored line art -­> colored

watsit said:
Which itself is a dubious distinction, as we don't tag the "version" of a post set [more text]

You've already told me this. Still, this was the original use of the colored tag.

I feel like colored is on it's way to become either invalid or disambiguated. Like the cub tag, everyone has their own definition of it.

Consider colored-in version as a placeholder until the site feels ready to do something about colored.

dimoretpinel said:
You've already told me this. Still, this was the original use of the colored tag.

I know, I'm just saying it since it would likely come up in defense of the alias or as a reason to invalidate both.

i share same mind with dimoret. we arguably need to invalidate colored and reestablish the tag into less ambiguously and more lucid like 'colored_version' since it's mistagged beyond what wiki entry says otherwise.

colored posts (excluding the uncolored/sketch version with it) are basically the default form that really doesn't have or need a tag for it, typically the uncolored version would be either monochrome and very specifically (color)_and_white. we essentially require to tag every million of posts just for "colored" tag, which we really don't need waste our energy on.

The tag alias colored-in -> colored (forum #390000) has been rejected by @dsco.