Danbooru

imply sleeve_garter -> armband

Posted under Tags

The bulk update request #10008 has been rejected.

create implication sleeve_garter -> armband

Wait, I just noticed that armband says the tag should only be used when it's over sleeves. We also force a distinction between armband and arm garter. That's pretty weird and unintuitive and I see hundreds of posts not following that rule, but for now I guess these two are the same thing.

The clause that armband should only be used over sleeves seems stupid and unenforceable to me because wristband has no such clause in its usage. I also see nothing on google regarding this definition of armband. I think we should consider fixing this. Not sure however how to handle this. Thoughts?

Our description is lifted straight out of the wikipedia page, but even wikipedia has examples of bare arms with armbands.

Updated

You choose to ignore though that the wikipedia for armband also directs to sleeve garter wikipedia when referring to the kind used for holding up sleeves. They're different from decorative/identifier bands like post #5192517, and post #5138632 and are intended to be used with loose sleeves to hold them up like post #4913214, post #5198012 or post #5147373. You can see how the sleeve kind of bellows out above the garter because it's holding up excess sleeve that would otherwise make the sleeve too long.

They have distinct appearances and purposes. I don't want to see post #5294868 when searching for something like post #4784058 or post #5279865. Plus, fancier armbands can be belts like post #3202531, while the armband wiki specifies it's just for cloth.
As a side note, the reason why sleeve_garter is mainly a touhou tag at the moment is that it's a tag I made a relatively short while ago, and started gardening it from Fujiwara no Mokou, since it appears in most of her artworks.

Then you're out of luck. From the last few days alone: post #5312160, post #5309197, post #5306270, post #5306024, post #5303524, post #5303428, post #5303227, post #5303656, post #5304548. All by different users.

How about for once we don't live in our own dream version of danbooru and actually look at how the tag's being used? It's getting really annoying that every argument is met with "but if people actually thought like I do the tag would be used differently". If nobody's going to care about your special definition of a tag and instead just use it how they intuitively understand it, then your definition is useless.

I've been on this site for 5 years and not once did I ever think to stop and check the definition of armband to see if someone decided 20 years ago that "achtually it's not an armband if it's a band worn over the arm!". How can you expect the average user to do so? Do you think this is not an armband?

Updated

nonamethanks said:

Do you think this is not an armband?

By our own definitions that would be an arm garter, i think.
I think the current separation is supposed to be
- sleeve garter for sleeve garters (aka most tight armbands around sleeve)
- arm garter for tight armbands around arm
- armband for loose armbands

arm garter was made at around the same time as sleeve garter, armband predates both by years as a catch-all tag, so that's why we have this situation.
Arm garter can be probably merged with or imply armband, since they're both for accessory purposes. I'm not sure i want sleeve garter to be gone though, because i think we will hit a similar point in time somewhere down the line where people will mass-remove them from armband, and they're specific objects with a specific purpose.

If you still want to go your way, my proposal would be to put everything under armband, and make a loose armband tag. That way one can do an {{armband long_sleeves -loose_armband]] search to find sleeve garters (although that goes against the two-tag search limit). (Or can find loose armbands easily).

I'm not suggesting getting rid of sleeve garter. It has a specific shape, so I'm perfectly fine with it being tagged. What I don't like is

  • having arbitrary definition that nobody will follow, and
  • having confusing names for each of these definitions.

An armband is a band on the arm, and no amount of wiki lawyering will change that. We can't have "arm garter", "armband" and "sleeve garter" as separate tags and expect anyone to be able to tell which tag to use. We've seen time and time again that users will just pick whatever they want in cases like these.

I think we should have a generic tag for bands on the arms (which will have to be armband), and then subtags that those interested in can garden and search for.

arm garter is too generic, it says nothing about how it's supposed to be worn. sleeve garter is better because it explicitly says that it's supposed to be used for sleeves, but googling "arm garter" just shows you pictures of sleeve garters, and as you can see in the post results it's being used for all kind of things, so it makes no sense for us to make up our own special definition of the term that everyone will ignore anyway.

There's also the issue that arm garter is also being used for something like post #5303540 which is literally an arm "garter" (as in "frilled band" garter, not garters). I guess those posts will have to be moved to frilled armband before the alias.

Updated

nonamethanks said:

The bulk update request #10008 has been rejected.

create implication sleeve_garter -> armband

Wait, I just noticed that armband says the tag should only be used when it's over sleeves. We also force a distinction between armband and arm garter. That's pretty weird and unintuitive and I see hundreds of posts not following that rule, but for now I guess these two are the same thing.

The clause that armband should only be used over sleeves seems stupid and unenforceable to me because wristband has no such clause in its usage. I also see nothing on google regarding this definition of armband. I think we should consider fixing this. Not sure however how to handle this. Thoughts?

Our description is lifted straight out of the wikipedia page, but even wikipedia has examples of bare arms with armbands.

Wikipedia article actually has a key distinction, in that it is around the arm over a sleeve if present. Which means that for sleeveless clothes they can be directly on the arm. So our definition is just plain wrong.

Regardless, saying that armbands can only be worn directly on the arm if you're wearing sleeveless clothes is also not correct, so I've simply gone and edited the article.

Wikipedia is not gospel. Be the change.

1