Implicating foxcoon → hybrid
Link to implication

Reason:

Also mammal/canine/fox/raccoon. I don't know how specific hybrid implications are supposed to be

why foxcoon is a tag? should those posts be tagged as fox, raccoon and hybrid instead :/?

Mutisija said:
why foxcoon is a tag? should those posts be tagged as fox, raccoon and hybrid instead :/?

Maybe. But that would get mixed up with other hybrids in the image.

Durandal said:
Maybe. But that would get mixed up with other hybrids in the image.

but we dont have tags like horsragon. it gets tagged as horse, dragon and hybrid. how foxcoon is any different?

I'm not a fan of made up species hybrids getting a made up name tag.

A: It's not a thing.
B: What if someone with a fox/raccoon hybrid decides he wants his character's species to be "raccox" or some other such stupid thing.
C: Where does it end? We already have something like 4000 species tags, if we start allowing names for 2 part mixes of all of them, then 3 part mixes, etc. etc. it just grows exponentially to the point where species tags become largely meaningless.
D: Makes TWYS harder, there's already an exception for the species that are parts of the hybrid, but there's no exception to TWYS for species. So, how do we determine if it's a foxcoon? You could easily draw 20 different fox/racoon hybrids and have them look totally different. So we'd be defaulting to source information to even tag the fake species name.

There's a couple common ones that I generally ignore (foxcoon, folf) but most are better off just being removed/replaced. Like Halite already stated there's far too many combinations of both names and species to consider all of them and I think we should consider the bigger picture before we start doing implications.

Alias these hybrid tags to hybrid, and the person tagging should just have enough sense to tag the species anyways.

Furrin_Gok said:
Alias these hybrid tags to hybrid, and the person tagging should just have enough sense to tag the species anyways.

I like this idea

Furrin_Gok said:
Alias these hybrid tags to hybrid, and the person tagging should just have enough sense to tag the species anyways.

The sheer amount of creative variations I've seen within the 10-100 posts range is ridiculous enough that I can get behind this. Before I wrote the wikis, I couldn't tell the difference between real species, fake hybrids, and pokémon. >.>

Where is the line between hybrid and originally designed species which different artists have based characters on?

For instance, say the species tabbit in post #42145 was originally created by orange04, and then tsampikos made his own tabbit using the same species design in post #107698. (I dunno if they really are based on one another but I'm sure there are much better examples so bear with me.) post #68996 obviously should not be tagged as that species, it should just be "rabbit tiger hybrid". But if I want to search for just tabbits of that design I don't want to have to sort through all the other potential hybrid designs. Could orange04's species be tagged "tabbit_(orange04)" or something similar?

So, yes, I think random hybrid names should be aliased to hybrid, but some species are specific designs I think should be sorted.

Jaser said:
Where is the line between hybrid and originally designed species which different artists have based characters on?

For instance, say the species tabbit in post #42145 was originally created by orange04, and then tsampikos made his own tabbit using the same species design in post #107698. (I dunno if they really are based on one another but I'm sure there are much better examples so bear with me.) post #68996 obviously should not be tagged as that species, it should just be "rabbit tiger hybrid". But if I want to search for just tabbits of that design I don't want to have to sort through all the other potential hybrid designs. Could orange04's species be tagged "tabbit_(orange04)" or something similar?

So, yes, I think random hybrid names should be aliased to hybrid, but some species are specific designs I think should be sorted.

Honestly, I think the best way to determine whether or not a hybrid deserves it's own species name tag is by internet popularity. If I Google image search the species name in question, and a majority of results for the species I'm looking for come up on the first page, then it's well known enough to warrant it's own species tag.

I think the only hybrids that should get their own tag are real ones, i.e. mules, ligers, etc. or if they're part of main stream media, like cabbits from Ryo-Ohki.
The only original species that really deserve their own tag are ones that aren't hybrids of real species, because quite frankly anyone can make a cross-species hybrid, there's nothing original about it.

Halite said:
I think the only hybrids that should get their own tag are real ones, i.e. mules, ligers, etc. or if they're part of main stream media, like cabbits from Ryo-Ohki.
The only original species that really deserve their own tag are ones that aren't hybrids of real species, because quite frankly anyone can make a cross-species hybrid, there's nothing original about it.

Agreed. It's probably the only way to keep us sane. Though mule is aliased to donkey at the moment.

I don't think we should go on a witch hunt to eliminate any possible tag from usage but the more well used ones should be cleaned up at least. If there weren't so many of them I'd suggest something like invalid_species or species_(disambuguation) but that seems like it would be a headache to keep clean and generally confuse people.

Come to think of it, I wonder how many of these are actually new posts. I see these hybrid tags mostly on older posts (particularly ones before the species category was in place).

parasprite said:
Though mule is aliased to donkey at the moment.

Probably because most users don't really know how to tell them or hinnies apart.

It's common enough combination to warrant throwing it in with hybrid, so I went ahead and approved this.

I'm leaving the wolf/raccoon implications off for now.