Posted under Tags
Do we really need the mouth_noise tag? What is it useful for?
BUR #25130 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
nuke mouth_noise
deprecate mouth_noise
Alternative BUR for voting.
The reason why we have the mouth noise tag is because a user was annoyed that posts such as post #5504107 and post #5716193 were being tagged with audible speech, so they took it upon themselves to make that tag instead to shunt them out of that tag.
Damian0358 said:
The reason why we have the mouth noise tag is because a user was annoyed that posts such as post #5504107 and post #5716193 were being tagged with audible speech, so they took it upon themselves to make that tag instead to shunt them out of that tag.
Understandable frustration but the name is terrible and makes it sound like an ASMR related tag.
thelieutenant said:
how about audible_gibberish lmao
A large amount of the post under the tag are girls moaning though. Is that really gibberish? Or perhaps in its current use mouth noise is too broad and should be split into moaning vs gibberish?
zetsubousensei said:
A large amount of the post under the tag are girls moaning though. Is that really gibberish? Or perhaps in its current use mouth noise is too broad and should be split into moaning vs gibberish?
I don't believe that moaning was intended to be part of this tag but due to the ambiguous name they've been lumped in. I think splitting this tag into audible_gibberish and audible_moaning would be good.
zetsubousensei said:
A large amount of the post under the tag are girls moaning though. Is that really gibberish? Or perhaps in its current use mouth noise is too broad and should be split into moaning vs gibberish?
The wiki specifically mentions that sounds that have their own tag like moaning, singing, and laughing shouldn't be in mouth noise, so I think it would just take some gardening to remove the posts that don't apply.
HeeroWingZero said:
The wiki specifically mentions that sounds that have their own tag like moaning, singing, and laughing shouldn't be in mouth noise, so I think it would just take some gardening to remove the posts that don't apply.
It doesn't help that, per the conclusion reached in topic #20767, moaning is supposed to apply to both visual depictions and auditory depictions of moaning, but not the former when sound is present in general, muddying the waters in regards to tagging practice.
Maybe we could make a meta tag for all vocal sounds. I suggest calling it vocalization (I also considered "vocals," but that seems to be specific to singing). We can then make a BUR with the following:
imply audible speech -> vocalization
imply vocalization -> sound
A vocalization -audible_speech search can then be used to find what the mouth noise tag is currently used for.
Obst said:
BUR #25130 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
nuke mouth_noise
deprecate mouth_noiseAlternative BUR for voting.
-1 for deprecation.
Regardless of current usage I see this tag being useful fro blacklisting "gross" mouth noises like lip smacking and chewing that some find unpleasent.
War6t2 said:
-1 for deprecation.
Regardless of current usage I see this tag being useful fro blacklisting "gross" mouth noises like lip smacking and chewing that some find unpleasent.
If that's something that there's a serious desire to blacklist then it should have it's own tag imo. Mouth noise as it is right now is pretty broad and was primarily intended for the skibidibapdop gibberish that vtubers spout when they freak out (or things like post #5414684). I don't know how much (if any) of the tag is being used for gross out noises like loud eating or burping.
blindVigil said:
Besides the debate of the usefulness of mouth noise, is there a point to tags implicating sound? According to its wiki, sound is added automatically if the video has audio, which would render the proposed and currently existing implications redundant, wouldn't it?
Something similar was brought up in topic #21227. The sound tag is added automatically by NNT's bot, not the site itself.
Yeah, there's no way "mouth noise" is ever going to work. "everything else" tags are always doomed from the start because nobody cares to read wiki clauses for tags with self-explaining names like these.
Blank_User said:
Something similar was brought up in topic #21227. The sound tag is added automatically by NNT's bot, not the site itself.
There's been some changes since then, now the site automatically adds it.
The bulk update request #25130 (forum #276338) has been approved by @nonamethanks.
The bulk update request #25129 (forum #276335) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.
I called it mouth noise because I struggled to come up with a better name. Maybe "babbling" would have been better, but that would have been a stretch for post #5362553, which was what really prompted me to create the tag. I don't think the concept is without merit, though.
Looking at post history, it looks like its usage had drifted pretty far from what I pictured. I really didn't want it to be an explicit tag,.
nonamethanks said:
"everything else" tags are always doomed from the start
The way I see it, vocalizations are either meant to be language, or they're not. In the first case, that's audible speech. In the second, there was no tag to describe it. So in my mind, it wasn't an "everything else", it was an "either/or".
babbling usually still refers to speech, so I think it would actually be more unambiguous to just call it "cute noises" or something to the effect of "nonsense noises", "unintelligible audio", "unintelligible speech", etc.; i.e., it's only a specific language if you can understand it
