AVID:Requests for Comment/Redefine how gore would factor in an NSFW logo

I have recently noticed there is a BUNCH of logos tagged NSFW that really are not even the slightest bit gory. Yes, there are some that are warranting of it (like that one Amy Schumer logo that's a picture of her removed uterus. yeesh)... but then you have some logos that are tagged NSFW simply because there's a few drops of blood in them, not even because there's actual gore. These include Paramount Digital Entertainment, NBC Universo, and pretty much all the offending logo variations for Electronic Arts. I also feel like all of Neversoft's logos getting tagged NSFW is also too strong, given that while the concept is a little off-putting none of their logos have any actual gore or graphic violence (at most it's implied) and their logos appeared on series many kids played. I feel like there should be some redefining as to how gore/violence would factor into a logo being tagged NSFW, as there's way too many logos tagged NSFW right now simply because there's a tiny drop of blood somewhere.

Support

 * I agree with every point in your request. The fact that any logo containing even just a LITTLE BIT of blood is now labeled as NSFW has also been a pet peeve for me these last months. Jet Dzhet (talk) 05:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I get that some people can be very understandably squicked out seeing blood, but putting the NFSW template on a page over a logo that shows a bit of blood is ridiculous and is not a good look for us. In my opinion, using the NSFW tag for blood and gore should only be reserved for if a logo contains large volumes of blood or has graphic depictions of organs showing. HibiscusCrown20 (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * per above --Blad  (talk • contribs • global) 16:13, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I do understand the concerns that the appearance of blood may be potentially squeamish, but the guidance banner is meant to cover graphic depictions of violence that would result in a 15 or 18 certificate in the United Kingdom. The point is that there is a distinction between fantasy violence and graphic violence: this means that, for example, the mere appearance of blood is insufficient to require a guidance banner. --Pingu (talk) 02:56, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Doctorine Dark (talk | contribs) 16:19, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Abstain
I feel like, instead of using a general "nsfw" tag, it may be possible to use a content warning system that warns the user that the content is graphic; for things that might have a little bit of blood, it could use a tag that can be quick and useful for the squeamish. The problem with using a 'nsfw' tag is that what is nsfw varies, especially now with the advent of a content warning or trigger warning being dependent on the user, I do agree myself that a little bit of blood shouldn't be marked as graphic per say, at least because it does put a logo on heads with a logo designed to be gorey or offensive solely for a purpose, some logos are products of its time and as a result may not be particularly good in the modern day.

Thats just my two cents at least based off of a generic and quick idea of the problem, but I might be super ignorant as I have not been here often, keep that in mind.

-E.J. 12/22/2022 10:06 PM EST
 * Could do, I guess. Gilby1385 (talk) 20:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Comments

 * 1) For this idea I really want a gore chart for those cases. This chart it will be only avaliable for administrators, and for me, that will be useful. It's only a suggestion, you can accept it if you want. User:Luli Logo (Talk) December 23, 2022 19:34 (UTC)