Posted under Tags
I was actually writing up a BUR to imply the various bad_* tags to error, but I then wondered if having error as a tag is redundant at this point, considering a majority of uploads here have some type of error or mistake, either anatomical or composition-wise.
It made me wonder if nuking and deprecating error might be an idea worth consideration.
I think the error tag isn't used for every error there is, but rather if the said error is prominent or otherwise irritating enough (For instance, I've been tagging it if the eyebrow merges with the bangs' outer line which can ruin the whole image for me at least).
That said, at least with its current wiki, the whole tag is problematic, as it's supposed to be exclusive from bad_anatomy (and therefore from other bad_* tags). If we change the wiki (which I do recommend) I can see such BUR be worth it.
As for usage, I don't know how many blacklists these, including error, but I see it being totally worth it to do so if such tag(s) exist. As from my side, as an approver, I quickly check tags before or while I am first glancing the image, and if I spot bad_* tags or error tag, I seek for that first, and evaluate the whole image after. It hastens my approving process tremendously in some cases.
Talulah had mentioned some time ago that she didn't want to see a bunch of posts tagged bad anatomy for small issues; extra fingers, odd looking eyes, ect and I think it's fair enough because there's a lot of posts that have an issue or multiple issues.
In the time since I made this topic, I realized the implication might not be a good idea after all so I believe another idea we could think about is taking any non-anatomically related bad_* tag and imply it to error, then take any anatomically related bad_* tag and imply it to bad anatomy that way they're separate.
My original proposal would end up with cases where a post would likely end up having both bad anatomy and error, and if the desire is to keep them separate then making error and umbrella tag is stupid.
