As the taur wiki is currently, it's inappropriate to tag taurs as either anthro or humanoid. But even in the wiki, there are examples of both these different body forms, making finding specifically anthropomorphic or humanoid-based taurs impossible if we fault people for tagging these creatures as such. Should we make tagging more lenient for better search fine-tuning, or should we leave it as a tagging violation?

I think the separation is silly. You can change whether or not something is a taur or an anthro by cropping the image. Not to mention weird stuff where you have a feral upper torso.
post #348631

we already have humanoid_taur to seperate human/oid upper halves from anthro upper halves.

dba_afish said:
we already have humanoid_taur to seperate human/oid upper halves from anthro upper halves.

Was there an anthromorphic taur tag? I couldn't find it nor a discussion about it.

I think taur could easily be like semi-anthro (although this tag isn't used nearly enough) in that it's meant to be tagged alongside whatever form it's closer to. Taurs with humanoid upper halves could get the humanoid_taur tag and anthro taurs can get anthro and taur.

My personal standpoint is that taur should be a subcategory of a more general mixed form tag. It's not always feral lower half and anthro/humanoid upper half, but other types of
mixed form characters currently have no category to fit in.

post #4396448

Such a tag would have to have a way of specifying which forms are mixed, solving this problem.