Very recently, someone got banned for badly tagging some pictures, and seeing how this kind of mistagging seems like anyone could be doing by mistake, I'd rather not take this route myself an actually ask for more clarification.

Anthro, from my own experience and from the wiki seems to basically mean anything that has a body similar to a human proportions wise, like the head being about 1/7 the height and so on. Semi-Anthro is a loose way to sort those characters that are right between anthro and feral, which is what I'd think of most of chibi/cute characters like Gatomon and for this case, Kero/Suppie.

post #50111

If you think about it, these two fit right in the description of a semi-anthro since they're basically "walking ferals", and they have a simple looking body not remotely close to anthro looking, having arms/legs basically being long strips of cute fluff and the head taking 1/3 of the total height.

I noticed my Kero being tagged as anthro and corrected it to semi-anthro, then remembered that this guy got banned for mistagging things and quickly went full paranoid and looked at the other pictures of Kero, and saw that they were also being tagged as anthro, but after the quick look on the wikis, I'll think they and other characters like these two should be tagged semi-anthro instead.

The Anthro wiki should emphasize if similar proportions to humans are needed or not. The description is sort of vague on that, only saying they should be similar to humans. The examples given all have human proportions but without any clear mention, I can't know for sure if proportions actually matter or not

Semi-anthro is a subtag, not a completely separate category.

Feral is tagged for almost 100% feral, and any kind of anthropomorphic animal belongs in anthro. Semi-anthro is tagged for characters that are in the hard-to-define grey area between anthro and feral, but they are still pigeonholed into either anthro or feral.

The semi-anthro subtag exists to offer extra flexibility for the searches. Because it's impossible to determine exactly where the line is drawn between anthro and feral. When tagging those, tag anthro or feral, whichever you feel is more appropriate. And tack on semi-anthro.

Genjar said:
Semi-anthro is a subtag, not a completely separate category.

Feral is tagged for almost 100% feral, and any kind of anthropomorphic animal belongs in anthro. Semi-anthro is tagged for characters that are in the hard-to-define grey area between anthro and feral.

Yup. I use it every day for those kind of posts.

It still doesn't tell me if these sort of characters should be anthro or feral, since like I said, they're basically walking ferals. If those are anthro, and basically anthro means anything that walks on two legs while having a body loosely resembling to a human, the examples they give on that wiki page should include some of them because by these examples, the very loose "looks like human physic" description and common sense, the indirect emphasis on having human proportions seem to be implied for a character to be anthro

Neitsuke said:
It still doesn't tell me if these sort of characters should be anthro or feral, since like I said, they're basically walking ferals.

There's no good rule of thumb that covers every body type and art style, but cartoony characters such as the ones you posted tend to be anthro. The neck and head position is usually a good indicator; those two look far closer to this...
post #757859
...than this...
post #936890

Therefore anthro + semi-anthro if you feel that it's necessary. Personally, I'd just tag those as anthro + toony.

So anything with the basic human body structure of a head/torso/arms/legs should be tagged as anthro, even anything this chibi like Kero, even like most of the Tamagotchi characters that have nubs for feet and hands and not actual limbs ?

Neitsuke said:
So anything with the basic human body structure of a head/torso/arms/legs should be tagged as anthro, even anything this chibi like Kero, even like most of the Tamagotchi characters that have nubs for feet and hands and not actual limbs ?

As long as you remember to tag those things as well, yes. Characters with a big head, big eyes, featureless limbs (ie. nubs for hands/feet), etc. will count, but will likely get the toony tag as well.

This is well noted then. However like I said, the Anthro wiki should really get some of that information too, because having "Human-like appearance" and 4 pictures examples that are all very close to an actual human physique give the impression that proportions are a factor

Well i tried to make a working system back then for this problem but it wasn't succesful.

Also just to add to the confusion with this anthropomorphic term everyone's been using.

Lately, I had a discussion about just that with a buddy and he also told me that the term refers to human likeliness and intelligence, so basically anything like Pokemon, Digimon, Tamagotchi and Thundercats are all example of anthros.

I looked up at an actual definition for it and I found this one :
"having a human form or human attributes"

The real problem with that definition people seem to use is the latter part. anthropomorphic is composed of anthro[po] (human nature) and morphic ([morphous] physique, attire, shape) and for years then, in my logical mind, anthropomorphic basically meant Character that has a physique or a look very similar to a human.

I'm also still requesting the anthro wiki to be more precise to what is an anthro, and include some toony examples on the image set, because like I said, with those 4 actual examples pointing towards a human appearance, it gives the premise that anthro should be used when the character's physique is very similar to a human's

Anthropomorphism means that visible human attributes are given to a non-human object. This can be as simple as a dancing teacup but in modern parlance more specifically refers to anatomy.

A "walking feral" is still anthropomorphic, especially if it talks.

FibS said:
A "walking feral" is still anthropomorphic, especially if it talks.

Depending on how picky you want to be, simply being able to talk is enough.

BlueDingo said:
Depending on how picky you want to be, simply being able to talk is enough.

Yeah, but for practicality, most folk in the modern era overlook that

BlueDingo said:
Depending on how picky you want to be, simply being able to talk is enough.

Although that's generally true, we don't use that definition. The level of intelligence has no bearing on how the forms (anthro, feral, etc) are tagged.

Under my eye from what I understand, bipedals are almost always ferals, including Cardcaptor Sakura's familiars

It's me agaaaaaaaain, for some more stupid question.

How about characters that are clearly both anthro and feral ? Like the ones that are based on feral characters but are shown to walk on two legs and even 4 when they feel like it. I tagged my recent upload as feral since it's loosely based on unicorn/equine, but just remembered how the character walks on two legs only just fine too.

Would that actually be a good example for semi-anthro ? I'd also still argue that Kero and Suppi and characters similar to them should be semi-anthro because being feral but able to walk on two legs should be a given. Also the semi-anthro tag contains a lot of characters that are very similar looking to Kero

Neitsuke said:
It's me agaaaaaaaain, for some more stupid question.

How about characters that are clearly both anthro and feral ? Like the ones that are based on feral characters but are shown to walk on two legs and even 4 when they feel like it. I tagged my recent upload as feral since it's loosely based on unicorn/equine, but just remembered how the character walks legs only just fine too.

Would that actually be a good example for semi-anthro ? I'd also still argue that Kero and Suppi and characters similar to them should be semi-anthro because being feral but able to walk on two legs should be a given

We only tag what we see in the specific image. Just because other images feature them walking on two legs doesn't mean they aren't on four legs there.

Doesn't help either because the character is, impaled and not on a walking posture at all. That and it doesn't change the fact that semi-anthro tagged pictures have a lot of bipedial characters that are for the most part feral, exactly what Kero and that unicorn character are

Just out of interest, what would you tag this as and why post #941669

I suppose you could use this scale to mark which one is feral, semi anthro, anthro and so on.

post #1032799

All I know is 4 is the best one.

kimjoy said:
All I know is 4 is the best one.

#3 has the best of both worlds.

Lance_Armstrong said:
#3 has the best of both worlds.

I'm only drawn to #5 but I'd totally steal 1-3's skirts.

post #1209157
Not sure if this qualifies as semi-anthro(?) Has human boobs/shoulders but the rear half is definitely borderline with the tail and leg structure.

kimjoy said:
All I know is 4 is the best one.

3-4 for typical real-life species, 5 for exotic or fantasy ones.

Ijerk said:
post #1209157
Not sure if this qualifies as semi-anthro(?) Has human boobs/shoulders but the rear half is definitely borderline with the tail and leg structure.

3-4 for typical real-life species, 5 for exotic or fantasy ones.

Anthro. Those legs are human until the ankle. The spine is questionable since it's longer than a human's, but it could be awkwardly drawn anatomy (I've seen snakier backs on drawings of regular humans) or an attempt to include the specie's long spine in an anthro.

And it's me agaaaaaain
Anthro/Feral seem to be confusing to pretty much everyone at this point.
From what I've been told here, anything remotely anthro looking/bipedial that is able to walk on two legs should be tagged as anthro, but then, pictures containing characters like these

post #1231357

Very often get tagged as being feral, even though they're exactly as Kero and Suppie : Walking ferals. Not sure if because they are based on mouse, or because a lot of people still refer to feral as "original design", but seeing that happen all the time makes me question on the validity on what is anthro and feral

Neitsuke said:
Anthro/Feral seem to be confusing to pretty much everyone at this point.

No, it really isn't. Just went through today's batch, and there were only a couple of mistags. Which is good, considering how much those are tagged.

This is a semi-anthro:
post #1237790
Clearly not a feral. And Kero and Spinel in your OP example are the same, just drawn in a much simpler style.

These have admittedly got somewhat muddled within the past year, mostly because of one mass tagger who keeps getting them wrong. And then newbies see how those are tagged and follow the example without paying attention to the wiki. The only fix for that is to, well, fix the mistags.

I'd do it myself, but I'm kind of busy with thousand other projects. Such as fixing bare breasts that have been misrated as explicit. Which has the exact same problem: newbies see the wrong rating, think that it's right, and then rate their own uploads based on that.

Like I mentioned maybe two times since, it would really help if some more examples than just very human looking characters would be used for the anthro Wiki. That should kill the confusion, at least for people who bother to look at the Wiki for confirmation

Neitsuke said:
Like I mentioned maybe two times since, it would really help if some more examples than just very human looking characters would be used for the anthro Wiki. That should kill the confusion, at least for people who bother to look at the Wiki for confirmation

Three out of the four examples are atypical anthros.

The first example is a standard anthro.
Second one, Smaug, is used as example of anthrofied, and to show that anthros don't require human hands.
Third one demonstrates that other features such as neck and eyes don't have to be human-like either, and that clothes don't matter.
And the pony is of the type that's often mistagged as feral.

Two of the characters lack fur and hair, to show that they don't need those to qualify as 'furry'. There's also a good selection of species from different groups, though I suppose there should be an anthro avian too.

We put quite a lot of thought into picking those. Not sure what more you want. If you have suggestions for an additional thumbnail to make it clearer, go ahead. Just nothing sexualized, okay? Needs to be viewable from e926 too.

Personally, I'd consider adding something like post #1037560.

If we are talking about structure, I reckon what separates an anthro/semi-anthro from a feral is primarily 2 parts of anatomy: #1 A wider broader pelvis for holding the large gluteal muscles nececery for proper upright posture and locomotion, and #2 Unlike a feral the shoulders need to be less parallel, larger and more dexterous for a more functional upper body.

If thats the primary, I would say the secondary things would be proportionally smaller legs, larger chests, and longer midsections. Another thing to consider might be the posture. I find that having a critter walk on its fours or having it rest in a more feral position adds to a feral aesthetic, at least for the creatures I draw.

I just thought I would add my 2 cents as I personally enjoy blending the lines of feral and anthro as much as I can.

There are quite a few images in the "predator/prey -video -zootopia -anthro" selection that should likely have the "anthro" tag but do not.

I’d like to go ahead and tag them so, but I’m not sure if I’ll not make any mistags. Could such possible mistags be potentially harmful for my account? If so, how should I proceed? Maybe tag only several images per day, or something else?

I was looking at the user records for a quick laugh for ban reasons, and noticed someone got a negative record for tagging stuff as feral instead of anthro (The tags are still unchanged by the way)

post #1485988 post #1483772 post #1483782 post #1481569 post #1478798

For me clearly, these are not anthro at all, except the third one where you can sort of argue the Floatzel is, even though the legs are still basically feral looking. I agree that they're not feral either but common sense (anthro, human-like | morphic, shape - Anthro usually being a shortening of anthropomorphic) says not anthro too.

I'll repeat for like the 9001th time : If for you guys being anthro is having arms and legs, then add more examples that don't only portray human proportions on the wiki, and change the description on how it says it has to be human-like because it's confusing people more than helping. It's now to a point where anthro basically means anything bipedal and not human-like and it's realistically better for everyone to not use the tags anthro and feral on anything they upload at all at the risk of getting banned

Neitsuke said:
For me clearly, these are not anthro at all, except the third one where you can sort of argue the Floatzel is, even though the legs are still basically feral

Any generic furry with those same proportions would be clearly anthro. Being slightly chubby or being Pokemon doesn't change that.

And again, I don't know what's supposed to be wrong with the wiki entry since you completely ignored my earlier reply. We did debate and pick the thumbnails carefully to have a good coverage, as I said in the previous post. The thumbs have mostly-human proportions, and so do the examples you posted (though the last one is debatable). So what's the difference?

If you all you do is resurrect the thread to whine without ever actually presenting something useful we might as well not have this thread in the first place.