Aliasing pikaslut_(character) → ketsueki_(character)
Link to alias

Reason:

Ketsueki is the character within the suit.

EDIT: The tag alias pikaslut_(character) -> ketsueki_(character) (forum #219832) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

My comment on the matter, and you could have done one alias request and edit in this second one.

Wouldn't aliasing pikaslut_(character) -> pikaslut be the smarter option?

BlueDingo said:
Wouldn't aliasing pikaslut_(character) -> pikaslut be the smarter option?

Depends. Should we get rid of the suffix? A legitimate question, mind you; I have no idea who or what Pikaslut is, bar these topics, so research may be needed. Let me put on my morning face before I do so.

Siral_Exan said:
Depends. Should we get rid of the suffix? A legitimate question, mind you; I have no idea who or what Pikaslut is, bar these topics, so research may be needed. Let me put on my morning face before I do so.

Sorry, I was fixing the older tags (It's been more than 5 years since the first images came out) and it appeared that _(character) was how the /type/ character was added to a tag. It honestly confused me why it didn't mesh with the existing tag.

Ketsueki said:
Sorry, I was fixing the older tags (It's been more than 5 years since the first images came out) and it appeared that _(character) was how the /type/ character was added to a tag. It honestly confused me why it didn't mesh with the existing tag.

you change tag types by writing character: in front of the tag. the _(character) is used only when the tag needs to be distinguished in case character shares name with something else. like strawberry_(character)

Mutisija said:
you change tag types by writing character: in front of the tag. the _(character) is used only when the tag needs to be distinguished in case character shares name with something else. like strawberry_(character)

So in that case should I re-tag the ketsueki_(character) items as character:ketsueki ?

Should I just add that tag to the PikaSlut images, or should character:pikaslut imply my own character as no one else has created a similarly distinctive latex-pikachu costume? (the PikaSlut tag isn't used elsewhere)

Ketsueki said:
So in that case should I re-tag the ketsueki_(character) items as character:ketsueki ?

Should I just add that tag to the PikaSlut images, or should character:pikaslut imply my own character as no one else has created a similarly distinctive latex-pikachu costume? (the PikaSlut tag isn't used elsewhere)

If the character is in a costume and you cannot otherwise determine that it is the character other than by knowing it, the costume is the only character tagged (if applicable) because you can only see the costume.

No aliases or implications are needed, nor should they occur. For instance, if the costume is empty, the costume implying a character tag is wrong (invalid). If there is another character in the costume, one that is not implicated, then it is still wrong. Ergo, no implications or aliases.

Siral_Exan said:
If the character is in a costume and you cannot otherwise determine that it is the character other than by knowing it, the costume is the only character tagged (if applicable) because you can only see the costume.

but external knowledge is allowed with tagging character names

Mutisija said:
but external knowledge is allowed with tagging character names

At an ultimate stance, you can't. A blue body and a penis qualifies as sonic the hedgehog, but just a penis doesn't. Some evidence is always required, like red foxes for Nick Wilde banging grey rabbits for Judy Hopps, but if you literally cannot determine who is in there, or even if someone is in there, you cannot tag the character.

Siral_Exan said:
At an ultimate stance, you can't. A blue body and a penis qualifies as sonic the hedgehog, but just a penis doesn't. Some evidence is always required, like red foxes for Nick Wilde banging grey rabbits for Judy Hopps, but if you literally cannot determine who is in there, or even if someone is in there, you cannot tag the character.

but you can see from the head shape that character is canine. shouldnt matching species and absence of contradictory traits be enough?

Mutisija said:
but you can see from the head shape that character is canine. shouldnt matching species and absence of contradictory traits be enough?

Yes, it would be enough, but it is not always the case. Thereforth is the point: without evidence of the character, you cannot tag the character. The suggestions go against that: it is always the character, even when there is lacking evidence or evidence against.

Or, in layman terms: the alias/implication would not work because it implies one other character. This may not always be the case; ultimately, you need evidence of the character to tag it. Without the evidence, or evidence against, the alias/implication is defeated, for if the character is not in the image or cannot be determined, they are not tagged.

The suit gets pikaslut, and said suit can be empty or filled by another. This meets my criteria, so the alias/implication does not work.

Mutisija said:
but you can see from the head shape that character is canine. shouldnt matching species and absence of contradictory traits be enough?

Nnnno? I can't see any canine shape to the head. It legit just looks like a pikachu. That's it.

The tag alias pikaslut_(character) -> ketsueki_(character) (forum #219832) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.