Do we really need it. There just names for a female or male horse. Why not just implement them to there respective genders?

A vote in favor.

Alias mare -> horse and female
Alias colt -> horse and male

I would agree, we don't tag dogs as puppies and bitches.

A vote against:

We have, as valid tags, "buck", "doe", "puppy", "kitten" (although this one is, mysteriously, a general tag and not a species tag), and probably more, since those were only the first four I bothered searching.

We can't have our cake and eat it, too, as the saying goes. I'm in favor of keeping/re-establishing all species tags that identify gender and age, simply because it makes searching much easier. This is especially true for those of us with the ability to only use five search tags at a time.

Aliasing "mare" to "horse" and "female", for example, would have the undesirable effect of NOT identifying all instances of images which contain female horses and identifying images which don't. What if an image contains a male horse and a female fox? I do a search on "mare" and get that result, as well as a bunch of other images that won't contain a female horse. You can verify this yourself by searching on "female" and "horse". For me (I have all MLP stuff blacklisted, so your search may be different) the very first image was of a stallion and a bitch -- no mare anywhere to be seen.

Invalidating and aliasing such tags, willy nilly, is only going to further confuse people and send the message that the site is not really committed to a serious, comprehensive, and consistent tagging philosophy.

Bottom line: We need an across-the-board official policy regarding gender and age specific tags and someone should see to it that all such tags are properly identified and modified as per that policy.

There, implicated for the time being, if there is a problem with this then it can be made into an alias

Also of interest, foal and filly, should these be made into implications or just left as is?

Rainbow_Dash said:
There, implicated for the time being, if there is a problem with this then it can be made into an alias

Also of interest, foal and filly, should these be made into implications or just left as is?

well foal is generally any very young horse male or female so that one could just be cub i guess and filly is a young female horse/equine so that could be cub, female, horse as well.

As I stated, Rainbow, I think all such tags should be preserved, but now that you mention it, they should probably be implicated in this manner, as well, if only to streamline the tagging process. It's a whole lot easier to tag an image "foal", than it is to tag it "horse" and "male".

Perhaps we need an "underage" tag, if we don't already have one, for species in which it's probably inappropriate to refer to the young as "cubs" (most baby birds, for instance, are called "chicks"). "cub" would then imply "underage". So would "colt", but "colt" would not imply "cub". This way someone could search for "colt filly" and just get hits that involve young horses. Both "colt" and "filly" should imply "foal".

RedRaven said:

What he said

As I stated, Rainbow, I think all such tags should be preserved, but now that you mention it, they should probably be implicated in this manner, as well, if only to streamline the tagging process. It's a whole lot easier to tag an image "foal", than it is to tag it "horse" and "male".

Perhaps we need an "underage" tag, if we don't already have one, for species in which it's probably inappropriate to refer to the young as "cubs" (most baby birds, for instance, are called "chicks"). "cub" would then imply "underage". So would "colt", but "colt" would not imply "cub". This way someone could search for "colt filly" and just get hits that involve young horses. Both "colt" and "filly" should imply "foal".

There is a young tag which just say the character is young. Foal does not mean there male, it is used for either very young horse male or female under the age of 1 year I believe. So Foal could be "young horse" tags colt can be the "young male horse" since a colt is not an of age horse. Filly is a female horse that is not of age so "Female young horse". And a Chicks can be hot to
post #85531 XD

@Mare/Colt
There's whole separate forum #49133 about gender specific species tags, and why, for now, it won't be changed.

@Filly/Foal
cub wiki clearly says that all furry and feral young are cubs here. And I like it this way, tags are for searching not for "correctness".
Also it's not 20pc, I'm skeptical about too many mlp specific tags.

Well, virtually every day we get these stupid, insane tags introduced that will likely only ever apply to a single image and we're discussing the merits of a comparatively few gender/age tags that are species-relevant and apply to many images? I'm not sure I understand this kind of mentality.

In the thread concerning gender specific species tags, Tony expressed his opinion that things were OK as they are. He even prefaced his opinion with the words "I think that", which means that this is a subjective assessment. It was not stated as a dictum.

While I respect his authority as an admin, in this case I think he's wrong. For those of you with unlimited tagging search capability it might not be an issue, but for those of us with only five tags available in any search, the ability to streamline a search with very specific tags is of immeasurable help in finding what we're looking for.

So, let's get those useful tags and start devoting our efforts to stemming the influx of tags as long as my arm that nobody will ever bother searching for in the first place.

I do understand about the "cub" thing, now that I've read that article. However, I disagree with the concept of aliasing all age-specific tags to "cub". Again, this is a matter of concern to all of us 5-taggers. Searching "cub horse female" takes up three of my five tags, when the single tag "filly" will do that job -- and insures that all of my hits will contain female horse cubs and not combinations of things like adult male horses and underage female lions.

Again, I can see how this might not be an issue for some of you who have "ranks" above us mere peons, but we, the unwashed masses, need love too, you know -- or at least some consideration in these matters.

anomaly said:
@Mare/Colt
There's whole separate forum #49133 about gender specific species tags, and why, for now, it won't be changed.

@Filly/Foal
cub wiki clearly says that all furry and feral young are cubs here. And I like it this way, tags are for searching not for "correctness".
Also it's not 20pc, I'm skeptical about too many mlp specific tags.

One thing is that it was never stated that was for MLP... It is just a something stated on a term used to identify a horse age or gender in one word... who called it a MLP specific tag....

Falord said:
One thing is that it was never stated that was for MLP... It is just a something stated on a term used to identify a horse age or gender in one word... who called it a MLP specific tag....

Yeah, suddenly e621 furry community, completely not involved in MLP, wants special tag for male_horse, and cub_horse_female, and not for any other species. Even the name of this topic screams MLP. Seems legit.
There is no "filly" word in forum search before FIM.

@RedRaven

RedRaven said:
I do understand about the "cub" thing, now that I've read that article. However, I disagree with the concept of aliasing all age-specific tags to "cub". Again, this is a matter of concern to all of us 5-taggers. Searching "cub horse female" takes up three of my five tags, when the single tag "filly" will do that job -- and insures that all of my hits will contain female horse cubs and not combinations of things like adult male horses and underage female lions.

Okay, should we also make special tag cub_wolf_feral_male_rape_human_female_pegging for those who wants to see pics of young feral male wolf that is raped by human female with strap-on? It's totally my fetish!

Again, I can see how this might not be an issue for some of you who have "ranks" above us mere peons, but we, the unwashed masses, need love too, you know -- or at least some consideration in these matters.

I've got my contributor rank just recently and it's not like I suddenly got another view on this topic. Too specific tags is not good strategy it was my view before, and it is now.

BTW unless e621 implements full regexp search neither I nor you would get exactly what is needed with search. Use tags, temporary blacklist and simply ignore some false positives. I've been user for most of my time here, and I rarely have had issues with number of tags in search. More restraining was tag and upload limit.

Also, what Kotep said.

tradition stands with the vixen verdict. No mare and colt tags. no filly and foal tags. no bitch tags, no vixen tags

Well I don't want there to be mare and colt tag. That's why I was thinking it should implement another tag but also to alias another tag. Example "mare" would alias to female but would implement horse or colt would alias male and implement horse. That way mare and colt would no longer exist but if someone search it, they well get results based on the words meaning rather than pictures tagged with it.

Aurali said:
tradition stands with the vixen verdict. No mare and colt tags. no filly and foal tags. no bitch tags, no vixen tags

But still can that Idea work? or if you alias it and have it function as a search for 2 tags under the words meaning rather than the word it's self?

Anomaly, it doesn't seem like you're actually paying attention to this discussion.

anomaly said:
Yeah, suddenly e621 furry community, completely not involved in MLP, wants special tag for male_horse, and cub_horse_female, and not for any other species. Even the name of this topic screams MLP. Seems legit.

I don't even like MLP. I have it blacklisted. Still, this topic is of interest to me, as I'm sure it is for many people who are not MLP fans. This is just one instance of an inconsistent tagging philosophy that happens to focus on equines. That there are people in favor of equine-specific tags cannot be implied that we don't want species-specific tags for others. You're arguing from the general to the specific. Therefore your argument is logically bankrupt.

anomaly said:
Okay, should we also make special tag cub_wolf_feral_male_rape_human_female_pegging for those who wants to see pics of young feral male wolf that is raped by human female with strap-on? It's totally my fetish!

Now you're just being silly. Reductio ad absurdum used to draw attention away from the real issue is not a valid debating technique. Ridicule is not a valid debating technique. Argument debunked.

anomaly said:
I've got my contributor rank just recently and it's not like I suddenly got another view on this topic. Too specific tags is not good strategy it was my view before, and it is now.

Your experience does not imply that everyone else will have the same experience regarding the paucity of tags available for mere members, as has been pointed out elsewhere by other people. I do happen to agree with your second sentence, but the issue is that "too specific" is not defined, except subjectively. What might be too specific for you might be considered too general by other people.

Frankly, I doubt the utility of "filly" and "colt" for most people, but "foal" would certainly be a good addition to the lineup of available tags, in keeping with other age-specific tags which we already have, such as "puppy" and "kitten". The problem is that there is no official, enforced rule against such tags.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can have a "puppy" tag, why can't we have a "foal" tag, or any other tag that indicates a "cub" of a particular species? If we can have a "buck" tag, why can't we have a "stallion" or "lioness" tag? Actually, we do have a "stallion" tag, but it's aliased. Why, then, isn't "buck" or "bull" similarly aliased? This is what I mean by an inconsistent tagging philosophy.

anomaly said:
BTW unless e621 implements full regexp search neither I nor you would get exactly what is needed with search.

You're right about that. I don't expect only postive hits on a search. However, as I mentioned above, we have a plethora of absolutely useless tags on this site. All you have to do is look at the most recently added ones to see what I mean. What I'm arguing for is the inclusion of tags which actually apply to more than one image and which would be of value to a substantial part of our user base. This would greatly facilitate searches, which is what the tagging system is all about. Just because you won't use them doesn't mean other people won't use them.

anomaly said:
Also, what Kotep said.

As you did, Kotep has had to resort to ridicule and exaggeration to make a point, which indicates that a logical rebuttal couldn't be found. For Pete's sake, people! There aren't that many age/gender tags in the English language! Why can't we add those few and eliminate tags like "its_when_you_fucking_lay_down_flat_on_the_ground_and_you_let_your_boner_lift_you_up_off_the_ground"?

As for re-tagging all those images, it will get done, eventually. We already have a truckload of poorly-tagged images. I don't see people complaining about that to this extent.

It's not so much a matter is a poor tagging philosophy as it is we just don't always get to every gender-species specific tag to alias it. I think we might have to follow suit with the gender specific tags, as much as I personally think it would be helpful. As for age-species specific tags, perhaps we could maybe implement some into the system so that we would have foal for equines, cub for canines + felines, and perhaps a few others for the larger animal groups

Also, if we have to retag a few things, that's okay. But extending the argument into "well if we alias violet to purple we might as wel alias male to female" isn't very helpful

Well, as I've already pointed out, we already have "kitten" for felines and "puppy" for canines, both of which should imply "cub" if they already don't.

Academically, my field was taxonomy -- the science of classifying things, so I actually understand the concepts behind what we're doing. In that field there is a dichotomy between two philosophies. People who like lots of categories are referred to by the other camp as "splitters". That other camp is known by the splitters as "lumpers", people who want to merge classes into a larger, more general class.

I'm seeing just that sort of "war" being fought here on e621 as it's been fought, sometimes rather vehemently, in the academic community. We need to put this all behind us and ask what's right for the majority of users of e621.

We don't have to cater to the vocal minorities, but neither do we have to reject them, outright. I don't think that people who want gender and age specific tags for various species are in the minority, either, but even if they are, those tags are useful to a good percentage of us. If the lumpers, here, don't like those tags then they're welcome to not use them in searches. That doesn't mean that the splitters should be left out in the cold.

My suggestion is that you remain consistent, though. If we're going to have some age and gender specific tags then none of the existing ones should be aliased to more general (and sometimes misleading) assemblages of tags. I think it reflects poorly on administrative policy when a tag like "buck" or "bull" has been around a long time, but the administration has aliased "stallion" to "horse" and "male".

It reflects even more poorly on administrative policy when the existing valid gender tags all seem to be male and the rejected ones all seem to be female. Granted, I haven't done an exhaustive search, but so far what I've seen seems to be fodder for conspiracy theorists. No I'm not suggesting a conspiracy, here -- only pointing out the obvious contradiction in the tagging philosophy, although I'm sure a few people reading this will immediately conclude (erroneously, of course) "The Administrative Staff, here, must all be gay."

As you did, Kotep has had to resort to ridicule and exaggeration to make a point, which indicates that a logical rebuttal couldn't be found.

Nope. I was exaggerating, Kotep was not. If horses should have special subtag, because you want them, then for other species, sooner or later there would be someone who wants it also. The fact that you don't want to listen to something doesn't make it exaggeration.

As for re-tagging all those images, it will get done, eventually.

*Looks at profile*
*waiting*
*still waiting*
*after 2 minutes finally got it - those loading times are really annoying*
19 tag edits. You sure know much about tagging, but let me correct you:
It will get done not before our death. I've spent hours on some mlp tagging projects and I have to take a break even though I've not finished it yet. And still it's size is really small comparing to changes that you suggest.
You know what - I'm really for option that admins would unalias few tags and let you do the work. If it wouldn't be done quick enough tags will be aliased again.

RedRaven said:
Well, as I've already pointed out, we already have "kitten" for felines and "puppy"

Both tags have about 100 uses, no wiki page, and just looking at posts tagged by them you can tell that people using them have different view, what should be tagged by them. No, I wouldn't say they're established here, and if you don't like them that much, they could be probably aliased any time.

Academically, my field was taxonomy -- the science of classifying things, so I actually understand the concepts behind what we're doing.

Lots of WORDS.

No, you don't understand. This is an primarily furry art site that contains a lot of furry porn. We want to:
a) Search something we like
b) Blacklist something we don't like
c) Fap to pron.
d) FOR PONIES!!!!!1111
Also I stand corrected. Pony fans and taxonomists are interested in this. I should add taxonomists to my PeopleIDon'tWantToMeet list.

BTW.

However, as I mentioned above, we have a plethora of absolutely useless tags on this site.
(...)
Just because you won't use them doesn't mean other people won't use them.

Ah, so you judging what tags should be is OK, but when I'm judging it's not. That's just not fair. :(

anomaly said:
Nope. I was exaggerating, Kotep was not.

I'm sure the number that Kotep gave (49,906) for posts that need re-tagging was arrived at through careful research and examination of each post, right? Nope. Kotep was exaggerating.

If horses should have special subtag, because you want them, then for other species, sooner or later there would be someone who wants it also.

Enlightment! At least this means you understand what I've been trying to say regarding the hodge-podge of species tags we now have. Furthermore, there are already species with subtags. I don't see you griping about those -- you just keep coming back to horses, although that is the topic of this thread, so I suppose I can excuse that. I wonder if you would be so keen on arguing about it if this thread were about goats, squirrels, or eagles, instead of horses.

The fact that you don't want to listen to something doesn't make it exaggeration.

I'm listening. I'm understanding where your point of view is. I happen to disagree with it, and I think that Rainbow Dash happens to agree with me, at least to some point.

*Looks at profile*
*waiting*
*still waiting*
*after 2 minutes finally got it - those loading times are really annoying*
19 tag edits. You sure know much about tagging, but let me correct you:

My output has nothing to do with my knowledge. You missed a few steps in your logic, there. In fact, I'm on a brief (hopefully) hiatus on my current tagging project awaiting administrator approval regarding some issues I had.

It will get done not before our death.

Welcome to the Real World. Life goes on even after we pass. We'll put a man on Mars, eventually, too, but likely not in my lifetime. Does that mean I want all work toward that end to halt, just because I won't be able to enjoy it?

You know what - I'm really for option that admins would unalias few tags and let you do the work. If it wouldn't be done quick enough tags will be aliased again.

Suggesting that someone shoulder all the responsibility for a tagging project that can be done by numerous people just as they browse the image base is a remarkable piece of illogic, in my view. Enough said about that point.

Both tags have about 100 uses, no wiki page, and just looking at posts tagged by them you can tell that people using them have different view, what should be tagged by them.

So what's the point, anyway? That there are only 100 images of puppies and kittens on this site? We both know that's a gross understatement. Your argument does not invalidate my claim that these are useful tags.

No, I wouldn't say they're established here, and if you don't like them that much, they could be probably aliased any time.

They're here. They're being used. Most of the images tagged do contain kittens or puppies. The admins haven't aliased them. Ergo, they are established. End of that argument.

No, you don't understand. This is an primarily furry art site that contains a lot of furry porn. We want to:
a) Search something we like
b) Blacklist something we don't like
c) Fap to pron.
d) FOR PONIES!!!!!1111
Also I stand corrected. Pony fans and taxonomists are interested in this. I should add taxonomists to my PeopleIDon'tWantToMeet list.

Argument by ridicule, again. Sorry, but it doesn't hold water. This isn't about pony fans and this isn't about me. It's about consistency in the rules regarding species sub-tags, and we have no consistency there.

That this thread deals with horses, and not the greater issue of species in general, is irrelevant to the validity of any arguments either for or against Falord's original proposal. It was a valid proposal, but action either in favor or or against that proposal must be weighed carefully in view of action/inaction regarding every other species sub-tag on this site. If it isn't, it only serves to further muddle whole greater issue.

Ah, so you judging what tags should be is OK, but when I'm judging it's not. That's just not fair. :(

The converse also applies, but, no, that's not what's going on here. The tags in question are primarily single-image tags that will likely never be used on any other image. Furthermore, some of them are so out in left field (generally because they read like dictionary definitions of an element of an image), that they are useless as search tags because nobody but the tag creator would ever think of that particular combination of words to put into the tag.

My judgments are based upon the utility of a tag -- not my personal preference in content. To be useful as a search tool a tag needs to be short, concise, and to the point, so that it can be guessed as a potential tag by someone not already familiar with the gazillion or so tags we have. Most of the tags I judge to be useless are not short or concise, and most of them aren't predictable, either.

Now, can't we just terminate this useless discussion? You've made your point. I've made mine. I have no desire to get embroiled in a flame war, even if it's disguised as civil discussion, and I see no common ground between our opinions on this matter. Let's allow the administrators to make a decision and then move on.

Aurali said:
tradition stands with the vixen verdict. No mare and colt tags. no filly and foal tags. no bitch tags, no vixen tags

This is how I understood the context of specie-gender tagging, although I can see why some users like RedRaven would want to use those kinds of tags anyway. I don't have a strong opinion either way; it should just be consistent and logical.

That's the problem, though, Furry Fantastic. It's not consistent or logical. The "tradition" of which Aurali speaks is not affecting the way these tags are judged by the administration, since we DO have comparable tags for other species, as I've pointed out several times, and they're quite easy to find. Just think of a gender or age tag applied to some animal species and do a search on it. That's how I discovered the ones I've pointed out, already.

No "filly", "bitch", or "vixen" tags, but we have "bull", "stag", and "buck" tags? This is a lack of consistency in following that tradition. The so-called "vixen verdict" was a mistake, since the same logic was not applied to all other similar tags. As a result, we have an entirely arbitrary mixture of valid, disallowed, and aliased species sub-tags.

All we need is an official edict (not a tagging "tradition, since not all people bother to follow traditions) and the administration needs to follow up on that and enforce it, including making changes to existing tags, and not just taking action on new ones that crop up. A policy is not a policy unless it's enforced across-the-board.

Now, can't we just terminate this useless discussion?

I agree. I don't like your way of treating someone with whom you disagree, and absolute certainty, that your way is right.

All species with gender or age based sub-tags should have them aliased away.
That would end the argument, and do so according to current tagging rules.

RedRaven said:
That's the problem, though, Furry Fantastic. It's not consistent or logical. The "tradition" of which Aurali speaks is not affecting the way these tags are judged by the administration, since we DO have comparable tags for other species, as I've pointed out several times, and they're quite easy to find. Just think of a gender or age tag applied to some animal species and do a search on it. That's how I discovered the ones I've pointed out, already.

No "filly", "bitch", or "vixen" tags, but we have "bull", "stag", and "buck" tags? This is a lack of consistency in following that tradition. The so-called "vixen verdict" was a mistake, since the same logic was not applied to all other similar tags. As a result, we have an entirely arbitrary mixture of valid, disallowed, and aliased species sub-tags.

All we need is an official edict (not a tagging "tradition, since not all people bother to follow traditions) and the administration needs to follow up on that and enforce it, including making changes to existing tags, and not just taking action on new ones that crop up. A policy is not a policy unless it's enforced across-the-board.

thank you for letting me know of these tags, and they will be promptly deleted. Also I do not like your tone. For one, saying we are all gay, is grossly false, as most of the staff is in fact female. Second, we don't see everything, and cannot, this site is too big, and the way your reacting does not look pleasant, and I very much advise you cool it.

Aurali said:
Also I do not like your tone. For one, saying we are all gay, is grossly false, as most of the staff is in fact female.

RedRaven said:
I haven't done an exhaustive search, but so far what I've seen seems to be fodder for conspiracy theorists. No I'm not suggesting a conspiracy, here -- only pointing out the obvious contradiction in the tagging philosophy, although I'm sure a few people reading this will immediately conclude (erroneously, of course) "The Administrative Staff, here, must all be gay."

I think that was a joke.

I don't think anyone should be taking this personally, though everyone should at least try to be respectful.

The reason it isn't "consistent", RedRaven, is that not all of these tags have been attended to. Only those like vixen have really been mentioned. If it is an issue I'm sure the staff and the community can fix it one way or the other.

Tags aliased:

cow and bull -> cattle
mare, stallion, and gelding -> horse
doe and buck -> deer

puppy -> cub
kitten -> cub
filly and colt -> cub

It's not rocket science, man, it's just tagging so we can find stuff to jerk off to. It doesn't have to be turned into some article in a scientific news journal.

As I said,

null0010 said:
Tags aliased:

cow and bull -> cattle
mare, stallion, and gelding -> horse
doe and buck -> deer

puppy -> cub
kitten -> cub
filly and colt -> cub

The problem no longer exists.

null0010 said:
Tags aliased:

cow and bull -> cattle
...
doe and buck -> deer

I don't know if it's actually going to affect anything, but does and bucks can also be rabbits and antelopes.

Wouldn't it be better to alias "cow" and "bull" to "bovine"? "cattle" implies plural. I've mentioned elsewhere that I don't see a need for tags that imply plurality.

Kotep said:
Hey, RedRaven.

The number I got for the posts that needed retagging?

I did research that. That's the sum of all the pictures that are tagged with the species that I listed. I wasn't exaggerating.

Then I apologize for jumping to conclusions. However (not knowing all the species you listed), I seriously doubt that the English language has distinct gender/age tags for all of them, or that the users, here, would be universally aware of them, anyway (female whales are known as "cows", for instance).
[/quote]

Kclub said:
It's not rocket science, man, it's just tagging so we can find stuff to jerk off to. It doesn't have to be turned into some article in a scientific news journal.

Funny that. I said the same thing about rocket science to back up my argument. No, it's not, and I didn't turn it into a scientific news journal article. I merely laid out a well-formed argument for keeping species sub-tags, giving valid reasons rather than simply stating a subjective opinion which wasn't backed up by facts.

And I agree with you, though. It's tagging so we can find stuff. That's why I like age and gender tags. It helps find stuff. Aliasing to more general terms makes it more difficult to find stuff.

However, the administrators (at least some of them) now seem to be in agreement over the policy of not allowing such tags, and I can live with that. As null said -- case closed.

Bovine encompasses more then cows.
Yaks, buffalo and bison are all bovine too, though being a taxonomist you already knew that.

As for using cattle, it's the best option despite being plural because there is no universally accepted English singular for cattle that isn't either a gender or age specific name.

And rabbits are does and bucks, too. Yes, I knew all that, but the convention appears to be gravitating toward lumping as a tagging philosophy for species, so that's why I suggested what I did.

We don't even use "canine" properly, here, since it's being used to refer to "canids". Canines are, technically, only animals belonging to the genus "Canis" (wolves, dogs) and do not include foxes and other assorted canids that crop up in furry artwork.

So, just as "bovine" encompasses more than cows, so does "canine" encompass more than just "canines", at least on this site. As I pointed out, earlier, consistency is important. "bovine" and "canine" are not being used consistently relative to each other.

Still, it's whatever the admins choose to do. I just threw out my opinion on the matter without going into the detail that some people, here, seem to find objectionable.

(ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻

RedRaven said:
Wouldn't it be better to alias "cow" and "bull" to "bovine"? "cattle" implies plural.

Cattle is both the singular and the plural form of the word.

RedRaven said:
does and bucks can also be rabbits and antelopes

And this is the greater problem with wanting gender specific species tags for all species, and it is why we do not (yet) do so.

null0010 said:
Cattle is both the singular and the plural form of the word.

Not according to Merriam-Webster. It is defined as a plural noun.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cattle

And this is the greater problem with wanting gender specific species tags for all species, and it is why we do not (yet) do so.

Understood and accepted. It's clear that the English language is just not suited for such a task.

RedRaven said:
Not according to Merriam-Webster. It is defined as a plural noun.

It comes from the Middle English catel, which is both singular and plural.

null0010 said:
It comes from the Middle English catel, which is both singular and plural.

This is true, but in modern English it is a "Plurale tantum" meaning it only has a plural form, no singular form.

Hammie said:
This is true, but in modern English it is a "Plurale tantum" meaning it only has a plural form, no singular form.

There is no other word that would suffice as a tag. cow is a female word.

null0010 said:
There is no other word that would suffice as a tag. cow is a female word.

Also correct, as I stated earlier, it's the best available option.
My vote is to keep it as cattle.

null0010 said:

mare, stallion, and gelding -> horse

Gelding means castrated horse. The problem with aliasing it to horse is that now if you search gelding you get mostly posts without any geldings in them.

Also now there are a bunch of gelding posts with nothing to indicate that they ain't got no buals. That's liable to screw with someone's blacklist.

Pseudonym said:
Also now there are a bunch of gelding posts with nothing to indicate that they ain't got no buals. That's liable to screw with someone's blacklist.

That why we have a castrated tag, it's simply underused.

Hammie said:
That why we have a castrated tag, it's simply underused.

So now someone has to go through all the horse posts and look for castrated horses and retag all of them. It also doesn't solve the problem of gelding being aliased incorrectly.

Pseudonym said:
So now someone has to go through all the horse posts and look for castrated horses and retag all of them. It also doesn't solve the problem of gelding being aliased incorrectly.

Yes, but to be fair, someone should have tagged it in the first place regardless of this alias.

Also, it absolutely solves the problem, just search horse and castrated.
If you want to blacklist it, blacklist castrated, since I doubt anyone wants geldings blacklisted, but not other castrated pics.

Hammie said:
Yes, but to be fair, someone should have tagged it in the first place regardless of this alias.

Also, it absolutely solves the problem, just search horse and castrated.
If you want to blacklist it, blacklist castrated, since I doubt anyone wants geldings blacklisted, but not other castrated pics.

You're really not getting it. Gelding isn't the same thing as horse so it shouldn't be aliased to it. If you search the word gelding right now you'll get a bunch of pictures without any geldings in them. It could be an implication, but it doesn't work as an alias.

So invalid tag it.

Pseudonym said:
Gelding means castrated horse. The problem with aliasing it to horse is that now if you search gelding you get mostly posts without any geldings in them.

If we allowed a special gelding tag we'd need to come up with special fancy snowflake names for every other castrated species. And that's just not going to happen.

Hammie said:
So invalid tag it.

That's not what the invalid tag thing is for, but I'll just make a forum post about it so you needn't worry.