The bulk update request #7947 has been rejected.

remove alias seducing_eyes (0) -> bedroom_eyes (100831)

Reason: This is a problem tag.

One of my prime examples of how many taggers do not read wikis. Instead, they look at existing posts with a tag, figure out a meaning in their head based on a loose pattern, and never question it again. For this tag, they tag the "look" and don't consider context restrictions. Moreover, this tag implicates seductive, but taggers especially don't seem to notice that. Or taggers don't understand that someone can't seduce for what they have (sex) and if someone is pleasuring themself (masturbation) then they are not seducing because they already have pleasure. These ideas should be fairly straightforward, not huge logical leaps.

The tag name is also just vague and could mean different things to different people without a logical way of picking a correct interpretation. My earlier research seemed to show that this concept on e621 came from Urban Dictionary. We can do better than a poorly understood slang term from over a decade ago.

I believe this alias more closely reflects what e621's old guard originally intended for this tag. An even better name could be figured out, but this might be okay. I am not saying this is the perfect tag name that we should use. It's just better than current. This change should create an expectation for seduction, which is what this tag is really about, and having this tag right above the important tag it implicates on a post's tag list makes sense.

I would love to reduce the number of problematic tag names with unintuitive wiki restrictions, like this one, where all we can do is say "DiDn't YoU rEaD tHe WiKi" and sacrifice hours or days of our time undoing others' mistakes, only for them to pile up again.

Follow-up

alias bedroom_eyes -> seducing_eyes

EDIT: The bulk update request #7947 (forum #403690) has been rejected by @scaliespe.

The wiki is also not perfect. Many tags have no definition or have been written to reflect one person's interpretation that isn't correct, be it inconsistent with similar tags or just doesn't match how most people use the term.

Nah, that's worse. At least for those familiar with the term, bedroom_eyes gives an idea of what to tag it for.
Whereas a new term like seducing_eyes has absolutely nothing about it to suggest that it's only for narrowed eyes.

Seductive_gaze? or seductive_stare, or seductive_look

I personally think "Bedroom eyes" is a perfect tag. It sounds nicer too. And most people already get the gist of what it's implying.

If people want to specifically search for seductive tones in art, they can easily use the "Seductive" or "Lustful gaze" tags.

And besides, anyone who tries to search for a tag like "Seductive stare" will automatically be suggested the "Bedroom Eyes" tag, so they'll put together what it means anyway.

wandering_spaniel said:
Seductive_gaze? or seductive_stare, or seductive_look

I think I like seductive_gaze. “Stare” and “look” can both sometimes have different implications, but “gaze” is pretty much exactly what this tag is for.

regsmutt said:
The wiki is also not perfect. Many tags have no definition or have been written to reflect one person's interpretation that isn't correct, be it inconsistent with similar tags or just doesn't match how most people use the term.

Then seductive should have never been implicated to bedroom_eyes 7.5 years ago (implication #7098) since that word's definition is also required. And if the seductive tag is not meant for seduction (aliases seduce, seduction, seducing, so these things cannot be tagged otherwise), then it is as bad as tagging hot or attractive, a completely meaningless tag on e621.

Oxford:

tempting and attractive; enticing.

Can't tempt or entice what you already have. We can't tag things "attractive," so... Nothing's left.

genjar said:
Nah, that's worse. At least for those familiar with the term, bedroom_eyes gives an idea of what to tag it for.
Whereas a new term like seducing_eyes has absolutely nothing about it to suggest that it's only for narrowed eyes.

In other words, we started using a pretty bad tag name in the olden days, many users never understood what was intended for it and that has only gotten worse, and we're stuck with garbage in, garbage out because bedroom = narrowed but [insert any other word] != narrowed. You don't want to reconsider that position at all? Do you realize how terribly that reads?

We should use tag names that fit the intended meaning. The closer they are to the intended meaning, the better. "Bedroom" has demonstrably been too vague to understand, so taggers fixated on the face only. This shouldn't be a difficult concept.

abadbird said:
In other words, we started using a pretty bad tag name in the olden days, many users never understood what was intended for it and that has only gotten worse, and we're stuck with garbage in, garbage out because bedroom = narrowed but [insert any other word] != narrowed. You don't want to reconsider that position at all? Do you realize how terribly that reads?

Google 'bedroom eyes'. A widely used term, the tag was never 'garbage'.
Then Google 'seductive eyes'. What you get is half bedroom eyes, half posts like https://w0.peakpx.com/wallpaper/114/809/HD-wallpaper-they-eye-s-of-seduction-asian-seductive-eyes-seduction.jpg

To put it into perspective: I just searched a small dataset of books for 'bedroom eyes'. Hits in 109 novels, by roughly 80 authors. Then repeated same search for seducing eyes. Zero hits. (seductive eyes was 12. seductive gaze was 25, but mostly used during sex scenes instead of before.)

You're proposing usage of ambiguous term nobody's familiar with over a well-established one.

We've had mistaggings for just about every tag on the site. That is never a good reason to start messing with them. It's no worse than missionary position, tribadism, or any other tag that require a bit of wiki checking if you're somehow not familiar with commonplace nsfw terminology. If an user can't be bothered to put in basic effort to check wikis and goes on 10k post tagging spree, that's not the tag system's fault.

abadbird said:
[..]
I would love to reduce the number of problematic tag names with unintuitive wiki restrictions, like this one, where all we can do is say "DiDn't YoU rEaD tHe WiKi" and sacrifice hours or days of our time undoing others' mistakes, only for them to pile up again.
[..]

I can understand the frustration, though if it helps, I just used a script to remove all bedroom_eyes tags on the search bedroom_eyes sex -solo -comic -animated -multiple_images -sketch_page -sequence, fixing about 16.8k posts. I've also made it so it won't check posts twice, so if someone corrects the one or two incorrect removals they'll stay correct, and I can always run it again later if the mis-tags start building up again.

I hope people don't mind me mentioning the tag automation here (main thread/topic #44138), I just thought it was relevent given you're discussing the tag I just helped with.

To comment on the aliases, I do think "bedroom eyes" is the better name for it, a lot of people know what it means and we'd likely end up with just as much mis-tagging if it was swapped round. Not to mention we also have half-closed_eyes, looking_pleasured, fucked_silly, orgasm_face, torogao and ahegao, which likely get just as many mis-tags with how similar they are, though I'd argue they're still all worth keeping given they're all slightly different.

The bulk update request #7947 (forum #403690) has been rejected by @scaliespe.