The bulk update request #7758 is pending approval.

create alias monster_girl_(genre) (12877) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through BUR
create alias monster_gril (2) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monster-girl (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monster-man (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monster_tf (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monstress (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monstrgirl (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monstrous_female (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)
create alias monstrous_intersex (0) -> monstrous_humanoid (3851)

Reason: To quote the comments on my "Monster Girl clean up" request

cloudpie said:
Maybe I just don't get it, but do we really need this tag at all? It seems to just be referring to humanoid characters in an anime art style?

watsit said:

monster_girl_(genre) should be invalidated, IMO. It's basically "feminine monster", for some vague definition of "monster" (which itself is a messy tag).
Sounds like a random selection of feminine humanoids. "animal- or monster-like traits" is the bread and butter of this site, further making the tag seem unnecessary. At best it's a lore tag indicating a character from a series that's of the "monster girl genre".

waller said:
create alias monster_girl_(genre) (12624) -> monster (40172) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur

You'll need to remove the existing aliases and implications to the tag first before the alias can go through.

the definition of "monster" in the monster_girl_(genre) tag and the monster tag are quite different.
monster_girl_(genre) applies to pretty much any species traditionally considered "sub-human" in fantasy settings, including zombies, goblins, and harpies, as well as humanoidized/anthrofied members of more basic monsters like slimes and mimcs, essentially if it's something you'd expect to see people fight in a generic D&D depiction but girl-shaped it's this tag.
monster applies to characters with a more horror-based design aesthetic. these are your elder gods, science experiments gone wrong, fleshy creatures from alternate dimensions, etc.

I'm not going to try to argue whether either of these are actually valid tags, but in either case, I don't think it makes sense to alias these together if monster is to be left valid.

dba_afish said:
the definition of "monster" in the monster_girl_(genre) tag and the monster tag are quite different.
monster_girl_(genre) applies to pretty much any species traditionally considered "sub-human" in fantasy settings, including zombies, goblins, and harpies, as well as humanoidized/anthrofied members of more basic monsters like slimes and mimcs, essentially if it's something you'd expect to see people fight in a generic D&D depiction but girl-shaped it's this tag.
monster applies to characters with a more horror-based design aesthetic. these are your elder gods, science experiments gone wrong, fleshy creatures from alternate dimensions, etc.

I'm not going to try to argue whether either of these are actually valid tags, but in either case, I don't think it makes sense to alias these together if monster is to be left valid.

If that the case, it should be alias to monstrous humanoid

dba_afish said:
the definition of "monster" in the monster_girl_(genre) tag and the monster tag are quite different.
monster_girl_(genre) applies to pretty much any species traditionally considered "sub-human" in fantasy settings, including zombies, goblins, and harpies, as well as humanoidized/anthrofied members of more basic monsters like slimes and mimcs, essentially if it's something you'd expect to see people fight in a generic D&D depiction but girl-shaped it's this tag.
monster applies to characters with a more horror-based design aesthetic. these are your elder gods, science experiments gone wrong, fleshy creatures from alternate dimensions, etc.

I'm not going to try to argue whether either of these are actually valid tags, but in either case, I don't think it makes sense to alias these together if monster is to be left valid.

Would just humanoid be a more accurate alias target?

strikerman said:
You'll need to remove the existing aliases and implications to the tag first before the alias can go through.

I will start BUR once its decided if monster_girl is going to be aliased to monstrous_humanoid, humanoid or monster

waller said:
If that the case, it should be alias to monstrous humanoid

the problem is that I don't think modern depictions of goblins and other fantasy races really fit the definition of monster or monstrous humanoid.

wandering_spaniel said:
Would just humanoid be a more accurate alias target?

maybe? the tag is quite frequently applied to taur and occasionally anthro characters, so that might not be the best option. honestly, straight invalidation might be for the best, but I don't know.

dba_afish said:
monster applies to characters with a more horror-based design aesthetic. these are your elder gods, science experiments gone wrong, fleshy creatures from alternate dimensions, etc.

Or a creature from Monster Hunter, or sometimes Pokemon and Digimon. The tag is poorly defined and people all too often use it when a creature is called a "monster" regardless of how it looks. "Monster" as a noun is too generic to be useful, while "Monstrous" as an adjective better conveys its intent. It too isn't perfect, but it's better, IMO.

As for the BUR, I'm completely on board with aliasing those tags away, though I don't know if monstrous_humanoid is the best target. "Monsters" aren't always humanoid, they can be feral, anthro, and taurs too. The BUR seems to also only have a few rarely used typo tags, aside from monster_girl_(genre). I think there are bigger tags that need dealing with, like the aforementioned monster_girl_(genre), along with monster_pred, monster_on_female, sea_monster, plant_monster, monster_penetrating, monster_tail, human_on_monster, monster_on_male, furred_monster, monster_penis, ... stuff that's using "monster" as a vague, generic term, that have 10s or 100s of current uses and are likely to be used again.

watsit said:
The tag is poorly defined and people all too often use it when a creature is called a "monster" regardless of how it looks. "Monster" as a noun is too generic to be useful, while "Monstrous" as an adjective better conveys its intent. It too isn't perfect, but it's better, IMO.

the tag abomination is aliased to monster, currently, I think that term gets the idea of what the tag is meant for better than "monster" does.