Implicating ice_elemental → elemental
Link to implication

Reason:

Like the fire elemental, air elemental, water elemental, and earth elemental, an ice elemental is an elemental creature associated with ice.

Someone should draw an ice elemental who's either a meth head or is made of crystal meth.

+1 because the others are implicated, too.

When do we cap how many elements get a tag thou, should we also be taging magma, plant, steam or plastic elementals too now.

both fire, air, water, and earth can be found in both greek and traditional Chinese elemental mythology, ice on the other hand is not found in ether, instead usually defaulted as part of a water element or hybrid of water and air/wind.

Darou said:
When do we cap how many elements get a tag thou, should we also be taging magma, plant, steam or plastic elementals too now.

both fire, air, water, and earth can be found in both greek and traditional Chinese elemental mythology, ice on the other hand is not found in ether, instead usually defaulted as part of a water element or hybrid of water and air/wind.

I'm thinking that's splitting hairs a tad too much. To me, if we follow this logic, ice is "just water" and should be just tagged as water

Sure, ice is water, essentially, but it's in another state. This site is TWYS, ice is a solid form that isn't water. Do we tag ice as water? Or mud as dirt?

facelessmess said:
I'm thinking that's splitting hairs a tad too much. To me, if we follow this logic, ice is "just water" and should be just tagged as water

Sure, ice is water, essentially, but it's in another state. This site is TWYS, ice is a solid form that isn't water. Do we tag ice as water? Or mud as dirt?

it is not splitting hairs facelessness, you state the problem your self just now, if we tag ice then we have to tag 100s of other hybrids and subcategories like mud, dirt or sand, hell even salt based elementals and dont even start with the mess of crystal elementals, which could well include crystallized earth(glass) for example, ice is also the crystallization of water.

PS: Ice under TWYS is water, what is seen is frozen water, it is not a change of material.

Darou said:
crystallized earth(glass)

Glass is crystallized silica. You can't superheat just any random piece of earth and get glass. You're far more likely to end up with volcanic rock.

Darou said:
it is not splitting hairs facelessness, you state the problem your self just now, if we tag ice then we have to tag 100s of other hybrids and subcategories like mud, dirt or sand, hell even salt based elementals and dont even start with the mess of crystal elementals, which could well include crystallized earth(glass) for example, ice is also the crystallization of water.

PS: Ice under TWYS is water, what is seen is frozen water, it is not a change of material.

But... it isn't tho. Ice shares water's transparency true, but it has no fluidity to it. Things like icebergs and ice cubes are very distinctively ice, and they don't really look like water at all.

Under twys, a person sees a giant ice cube that has a frozen person in it. The person isn't gonna tag water, it's ice. They will tag ice. Ice IS literally frozen water, yes, but visually it is entirely different. Unless the ice is, say, submerged in water, no one is going to tag it as water. It isn't water.

Also, as dingo said, earth is specifically crystalized silica.

BlueDingo said:
Glass is crystallized silica. You can't superheat just any random piece of earth and get glass. You're far more likely to end up with volcanic rock.

Then how do you explain all these?

glass which is silica which is sand in most cases and that in turn is earth, earth which in-turn is carbon which in-turn is matter, matter which is ether...

to be clear, i didnt say you were wrong but both are correct as far as TWYS is concerned, but we talking about species not background elements, in the case of background elements it does make sence to separate to search for pictures depicting a water hole in a iced landscape from a empty iced wasteland for example.
Applying that to species on the otherhand is like saying a snake stops being a snake when it is furred instead of scaled...

Again this is about keeping it simple and not too specific, only assigning tags for elements that have a established mythology, otherwise we must create tags for every single element and its states there is in the world.

Darou said:
to be clear, i didnt say you were wrong but both are correct as far as TWYS is concerned, but we talking about species not background elements, in the case of background elements it does make sence to separate to search for pictures depicting a water hole in a iced landscape from a empty iced wasteland for example.
Applying that to species on the otherhand is like saying a snake stops being a snake when it is furred instead of scaled...

But that's where tags like furred dragon or fluff snake come in, specifying these specific differences in otherwise relatively iconic species while also following TWYS and correctly tagging content.

Ice elemental in this case is like furred dragon in that sense; in fact, your argument could apply to tags like furred dragon and feathered dragon, yet they're used quite often.

As for "not being too super specific" with tags, I feel if they're tagged often enough (a la furred and feathered dragons) and seem to be very obvious enough to others that they're specifically these things and not something else, they're worthy of a broad tag. Ice elemental has around 20+, which is enough I find

facelessmess said:
But that's where tags like furred dragon or fluff snake come in, specifying these specific differences in otherwise relatively iconic species while also following TWYS and correctly tagging content.

Ice elemental in this case is like furred dragon in that sense; in fact, your argument could apply to tags like furred dragon and feathered dragon, yet they're used quite often.

As for "not being too super specific" with tags, I feel if they're tagged often enough (a la furred and feathered dragons) they're worthy of a broad tag. Ice elemental has around 20+, which is enough I find

to be herd it kind of makes sence that one of the most variable fictional creatures in the world would be an exception, those compacts arent found for any other species thou.
All other species must be taged as its species and fur or skin for exsample as a general attribute separately...

Darou said:
to be herd it kind of makes sence that one of the most variable fictional creatures in the world would be an exception, those compacts arent found for any other species thou.
All other species must be taged as its species and fur or skin for exsample as a general attribute separately...

I don't know, I still feel if it's so distinctive and widespread enough that it's seen as something that could be specifically searched for separate from other tags, then why not have a separate tag? Earth pony vs pony, for example.