Read the rules before proceeding!

Topic: Tag implication: em_being -> alien

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Hello .

I agree with you.

No doubt, They used the word "Alien(宇宙人)".

Updated

gloomy_wing said:
Yes, that is the very definition of an Alien.
No doubt, They used the word "Alien(宇宙人)". 😀ゞ

There's been some recent argument about where the alien tag should actually apply, and the wiki does include the line:
Keep in mind that this tag should only be added if the creature looks like an alien by twys. Do not tag this by outside information.
The question here should probably be whether em_beasts look "alien" enough for the tag. I think they might, but I could also see people interpret some posts otherwise.
Characters like m'ress should probably be cleaned out of the alien wiki and moved to a lore-tag variant now that we have those.

I do want to say it's good to see new users getting into tag discussion.

magnuseffect said:There's been...

Hello .

I'm Sorry , I didn't know about that problem of e621. I'll be more careful.
I see. In this case, It's important to know whether you/everyone Can Look It?, or Not?.

Based on that,
The "species" of "Omega-Xis" is now classified as "robots" already.
That's because it has robot-like parts on its chest. ( But He says he is made of "radio_waves". )

This is what I found on the wiki's robot page:

Humanoid robots should also be tagged android. Organic creatures with robotic parts should not be tagged as robots, but cyborgs instead.

And This is what I found on the wiki's cyborg page:

A cyborg is a being with both biological and synthetic (e.g. electronic, mechanical, or robotic) parts. Cyborgs are biological beings with robot bits added on, but robots with biological bits added on (eg. Beast Wars Transformers) are not considered cyborgs.

According to that, I think the problem changes like this:
Is "Omega-Xis" Cyborg or Not?

  • If the answer is Yes, then the "cyborg" tag is appropriate,
  • And if it's No, then the "robot" tag is appropriate as it is.
    ---I don't know the nuances of what "organic" means to me, so I'm not likely to be able to give you a yes or no answer. sorry.
    (At least I know that the radio waves don't contain carbon.)

But at least it does not seem to be an alien.
...Then It would be "I disagree".
Instead, I think it may needs to be tagged with a "Cyborg" tag.

I realized that "thinking about why things seem strange at first glance are the way they are" is important when dealing with characters and e621. I do think it's important for me to participate in discussions , too.

I’d like to ask you for your help.

Updated

gloomy_wing said:

Based on that,
The "species" of "Omega-Xis" is now classified as "robots" already.
That's because it has robot-like parts on its chest. ( But He says he is made of "radio_waves". )

Some species tags a character might have aren't always suitable, as artists may draw a character many different ways.

According to that, I think the problem changes like this:
Is "Omega-Xis" Cyborg or Not?

  • If the answer is Yes, then the "cyborg" tag is appropriate,
  • And if it's No, then the "robot" tag is appropriate as it is.

I took a look through the posts and it seems to vary.
I did find an electricity_creature tag that I think suits some posts, so I started tagging that.

I'm not always correct, but this is what I think.

---I don't know the nuances of what "organic" means to me, so I'm not likely to be able to give you a yes or no answer. sorry.

I don't know much Japanese and translation isn't always easy, I think 肉体 might be suitable when talking about what it means for character tagging? "meat body/form" seemed like the best fit. "Organic" would also work for flora_fauna tagging.
I hope this helps, I don't know how well my English translates.

magnuseffect said:Some species....

I think you're right about the difference between "robot" and "cyborg", too.

Hmmmm... , Certainly .
Well , He does take his parts off at times,...huh......?.🤔 (--Even though it's never official).
As long as it's "how_it_looks" that's important, So they shouldn't be tagged the same, now ,I think so too.
 
In Japanese, the word 「 肉体 」( にくたい , Nikutai ) means 「 生身の体、生きている生物の体、肉身 」
In other words :

  • has Blood/body_fluid in it ( = is made of Water and Carbon),
  • has electrical signals that are tied to the body and cannot be retrieved ← It's the source of our minds and emotions.
  • They get sick, and they have a life span.
  • If their bodies are damaged or lost, they'll be irreparably damaged.
    ↓↓↓
    If that is
  • True for : humans, animals, plants(flora_fauna), (maybe even insects?)
  • But Not for : robots [ in the general sense of being made of metal ]......and EM like him.
    ---"Not", Because if he (or his partner) uses the recovery card, he can recover. The body itself is an electrical signal because it's a radio wave to begin with.

Then So, Our Meaning of Organic/Meat_Body/肉体 is the Same.

Still, they have the same places.
Even Robots/EM have their own minds and emotions, so I think we can say that a living being = a Creature.
So in terms of whether or not they are living beings, I can say that it makes NO difference at all.
 
There are a few different tags for him, robot or cyborg or alien ← No , That's just my initial assumption
I would really like to put it in one of the existing ones, but I don't do that. Because Now I Can be Sure those things are Different.
----I mean: Alien, (Organic), Cyborg,
And, The "Robot" tag is supposed to be correct as well===But as artists may draw a character many different ways.

Then, the common tag "Electricity_Creature" that can be used in any case.
It means a Creature made of Electricity.
I don't think the "Can_Look_It?, or_Not?." issue is relevant, and I don't think "Electricity" + "Creature" would ever lie in any case.
I agree with your opinion.

Therefore, now I can say this about my opinion:

  • Positive : Electricity ← He's electricity itself, because he's a radio wave. That's never going to change.
  • Positive : Creature ← A being with its own mind, emotions and will.
  • Negative : alien ← No , It was just my initial assumption --- TWYS - "Do not tag this by outside information."
  • Negative : robot ← Depending on how the artist paints, that may not always be the case.
  • Negative : (Organic) ← He's alive too, but not in the Flesh_Body/Meat_Body.
  • Negative : Cyborg ← Not Orgranic , Not Meat_Body = Not Cyborg.

So , "The tag implication em_being -> alien" , I Disagree.  Instead He should be tagged "Electricity_Creature", I think.

I thank you very much for your cooperation! 😀😌

Updated

gloomy_wing said:
Therefore, now I can say this about my opinion:

  • Positive : Electricity ← He's electricity itself, because he's a radio wave. That's never going to change.
  • Positive : Creature ← A being with its own mind, emotions and will.
  • Negative : alien ← No , It was just my initial assumption --- TWYS - "Do not tag this by outside information."
  • Negative : robot ← Depending on how the artist paints, that may not always be the case.
  • Negative : (Organic) ← He's alive too, but not in the Flesh_Body/Meat_Body.
  • Negative : Cyborg ← Not Orgranic , Not Meat_Body = Not Cyborg.

So , "The tag implication em_being -> alien" , I Disagree.  Instead He should be tagged "Electricity_Creature", I think.

I thank you very much for your cooperation! 😀😌

It's complicated.
The "outside information" rule applies to almost everything, but there have to be exceptions for character names, or the name of a fictional species, or else you couldn't tag them at all.
A species from reality can be given tag implications thanks to centuries of evolutionary taxonomy, and because reality is difficult to change.
We can say:

But because we can't use this type of information for a fictional species, we can only tag a name (em_being), and everything else has to be decided with "how_it_looks."
It can be complicated (if something "looks like" a western_dragon but has a different species name in its story, it's still a western_dragon) and there's not always agreement on what something looks like, but that's as simple as I can explain.

Updated

magnuseffect said:It's complicated.....

I know well that you are worrying.

Now it connected.😯

  • We are really only allowed to rely on external information in e621 at a minimum.
  • In this case, the only exceptions allowed are "its_Name" and "the_original_Animation".
    The other factors have to be determined by us.

If you/someone want to see the same character's posts, all you have to do is look them up by name.
So I think the way to classify species in e621 is,
An being that brings together "the same kind of posts" across multiple characters = we call them Tags.
... about "how_it_looks." , isn't it?

I think the possibility of One character being Tagged Differently Must be Considered
if "how_it_looks" is more important than a uniform tagging of him as a rule (...convention?) in e621
---That's when it gets complicated, I think so too.

For Example : stitch_(lilo_and_stitch) -alien

There is a picture in it that is NOT Alien by any means. ( For now, I'm going to assume that Stitch is an alien. )
I think it is wrong to classify this picture as an alien, Even though the stitch is an Alien.
---Tagging a stuffed_animal or clothing post is definitely not a good idea, I think .

If that happened, the Tag may be meaningless.
( And it eliminates the point of the admin going to all that trouble to tell everyone "USE-YOUR-BLACKLIST". )
Because if I want to find a picture of the same character, I can just search for the character's name.
I see...I guess I misunderstood. So this is why there's a lot of tagging and thoroughness in e621.

...But at least ,
I can say that just putting the Alien tag on him is wrong.( Only for the post that is currently posted. )
Because it's a misunderstanding that doesn't follow "TWYS_of_e621" including me, and also doesn't fit "how_it_looks" (at least I think it does).
And Because you told me there was a way to classify him as a "Robot(+ electricity_creature)" or a "Cyborg".

With that in mind,
I'm starting to think it's not a good idea to put a single species tag on him.
If I want to say, "It's a Robot But it's an electricity_creature".....Hmm
I wonder if he should be given a "robot" or "cyborg" tag after all.......I am confused....

Updated

I'll say "I disagree" for now,
but I'll think about what to do in the future after seeing the topic

It's not gonna be Easy.

It's going to be difficult to participate directly in the discussions on the other side, but if I notice something, I'll say it.

In the meantime, I personally am thinking of
It means we should be clear about why em_being can be alien. Where are the standards of e6? I'm going to wait to answer that decision until I can.

It's important : Where's the line for alien there?

Updated

gloomy_wing said:

With that in mind,
I'm starting to think it's not a good idea to put a single species tag on him.
If I want to say, "It's a Robot But it's an electricity_creature".....Hmm
I wonder if he should be given a "robot" or "cyborg" tag after all.......I am confused....

A character can be a robot, cyborg, or elemental_creature and something else at the same time.
post #2447238 This is a robot domestic_dog.
post #2359317 This is a cyborg wolf.
post #2298511 This is a fire_creature canid.
Think of tags like robot, cyborg, or elemental_creature not as primary (主要 I think. I checked DeepL and it might just turn "primary" into Katakana..) species tags, but supplementary (補足?) tags that are still included to help define what a character is.

There is a picture in it that is NOT Alien by any means. ( For now, I'm going to assume that Stitch is an alien. )
I think it is wrong to classify this picture as an alien, Even though the stitch is an Alien.
---Tagging a stuffed_animal or clothing post is definitely not a good idea, I think .

Character tags are the biggest exception to TWYS.
A character can still be tagged even if they are just a cosplay, a plushie, a picture_in_picture, or even head_out_of_frame.
A character tag doesn't always mean a post gets the species tags though. It gets confusing, and if there was a decision about this, I don't know about it.
post #2414106 This Stitch costume doesn't have the experiment_(lilo_&_stitch) tag.
post #2065839 But this Eevee is only identifiable as a species.
post #2191090 Yet a costume of a real animal often isn't tagged.
post #205076 substitute doesn't even have a species. inanimate_object is only there because it's a plushie.

magnuseffect said:A character can be a robot, cyborg, or elemental_creature and something else at the same time.

Oh, I should have thought of it that way.
So Even If a post was tagged in some way, that's not a reason to prevent it from being tagged differently.
And since they are only describing some of the features of post, there is no problem with using them in combination.

( I think I said "it's not a good idea to put a single species tag on him." which was a bit odd. )
Even Warrock is Electricity_creature , it would be wrong to put only the electricity_creature tag for all posts. Putting a common species tag on All posts that depict a certain character, makes the tag meaningless.
Because each tag that should be attached depends on the nature of the post(who is really out there) and "how_it_looks",And artists may draw a character many different ways.

post #186940 This is robot and felid. ( I don't need to tag it with a single tag , like "cat_type_robot". )
Is my understanding(s) correct?
~~
If it is so , even there is an EM_being(alien in the Outside information) in the post, it makes me wonder if it's okay to tag it as alien.
The idea is that if we can see them as aliens, we should tag them as alien. Currently I think they are better with robots, cyborg,elemental_creature tags.
I think the tags to be attached to Wolf the EM_being before it became Wolf_Woods would be robot,elemental_creature and wolf.
(In this case, wolf species tag is for Complement [補完], Completing the post description by filling in the parts of the robot tag that can't be explained by the tag alone.)

On the contrary,When an character didn't look alien...It would be exactly the same thing as in the case of topic #27452 Tag implication: caitian -> alien.
Even I don't know much about the work or the plot(setting), but even I can see that it is indeed impossible to call it Alien. Caitian don't look like alien to me,Until I learned that this work is set in space. They look like any anthro felid,I think so too.

As I mentioned in my first bad post,
To an Earth_being, the Cosmic_being(Not Earth_being) is alien ,But To a Cosmic_being, the Earth_being is the alien.

...So I guess Caitian was called alien Because it was not us Earth_being(in the Outside information) in the topic,isn't it?
My understanding is that this kind of thinking is wrong in e6.
 
However having said that,I wonder What makes it possible to say the creature looks like an alien. If I get this perception wrong, I'll have trouble when I post to e6 in the future.

Keep in mind that this tag should only be added if the creature looks like an alien by twys. Do not tag this by outside information.

I've been browsing the [REJECTED] Tag implication: lombax -> alien
I never thought lombax was alien when I saw my friends play "Ratchet_and_Clank" the game, but,
The problem: where to draw the line on these things .... I don't know the answer to the problem after all..
At least it seems odd to me The reason for the alien tag is It's alien because it's not an "Earth_being", it's a "Cosmic_being"    [update OK]

Updated

(I'm replying to a slightly older version of your post so it might not match perfectly.)

gloomy_wing said:
Is my understanding(s) correct?

Yes, I think so.

I wonder What makes it possible to say the creature looks like an alien

That's one of the problems being discussed in other threads.
Even tags as large as alien don't always work as intended, or at all. Neither art or users are as mechanical and consistent as a tagging system needs to be.
Sometimes a tag is "close enough" to be used when it's not accurate, and nothing is done until enough users argue about it.
Another large problem with some tags is that many users will tag using what words mean outside e621. Then other users copy that tagging without realising, and it keeps going until someone notices it's wrong.
I recently found implants, which is tagged 117 posts that should be either breast_implants or cybernetics.

The problem: where to draw the line on these things .... I don't know the answer to the problem after all..

If I get this perception wrong, I'll have trouble when I post to e6 in the future.

The truth is none of us know for sure that we are right. We're all still making things up as we go.
The "lore" tag category didn't exist before this year, and users are still trying to figure out how to use it.

magnuseffect said:The "lore" tag category didn't exist before this year, and users are still trying to figure out how to use it.

I didn't know...That's why there was a discussion going on in forum. But I know that some users using what words mean outside e621. (--Just like I was in the beginning.)

Currently, Xenomorph and Neomorph are implied in alien, so   Xenomorph ≒ Neomorph ( We at e6 see them as a similar species, alien, aren't we? )
If EM_being is implied in alien, then  Xenomorph ≒ Neomorph ≒ EM_being

....."All creatures except for those on earth should be eliminated!" = tagging alien, so that's it? Hmm , I don't see the point of doing this in tagging.

Aren't those characters, Xenomorph and Neomorph collected because they have a similar design? And the name of that group may have been "Alien"...?

Updated

gloomy_wing said:
Currently, Xenomorph and Neomorph are implied in alien, so   Xenomorph ≒ Neomorph ( We at e6 see them as a similar species, alien, aren't we? )
If EM_being is implied in alien, then  Xenomorph ≒ Neomorph ≒ EM_being

A problem with em_being in this situation is that none of the parts innately (本質的に?) look alien.
electricity_creature just means it looks like it's made of electricity.
green_skin on a humanoid body only means green_skin humanoid.
And the head design looks more like a dragon than anything else, which doesn't make it alien either.

Aren't those characters, Xenomorph and Neomorph collected because they have a similar design? And the name of that group may have been "Alien"...?

Xenomorph and Neomorph do look like what most users agree alien should be, but the next problem is "what makes that appearance alien when someone could design a fantasy creature with the same features?"
Xenomorph ≒ Neomorph via the alien tag is a false association. Both are alien independently, despite looking similar and being related by outside information. They could be united by their own species tag, but I don't know if it's a good idea to start using tags like alien_(alien_franchise).

magnuseffect said:A problem with em_being in this situation is that none of the parts innately (本質的に?) look alien

Exactly So I think my Quote content is a bad idea. I thought it was weird myself🤔.
You are right about why Warrock is not alien,I think.
And I think it is a Good Idea to use the alien_(alien_franchise) to try to unify the aliens. If it is adopted, I think I Can say that what I said in my Quote is wrong, too.

When a character is looked at as alien, What makes that appearance? : now I have to think about this
In my opinion, Right or wrong, I'm not afraid to say, example :

  • elongated head ( motif of genital ), the shape of the skull , no Hair ,
  • sometimes don't have a nose/eyes/ears , eyes without an Iris ( like a marble ) , number of eyes and feet ,
  • double chin , sense of touch, impossible thin limbs/neck on earth,
  • tough outer skin ( like a silicon resin? ) == Smooth looking not fur or human skin , protrusions in some places ,
  • Mollusks == Octopus and Squid in the sense that they don't seem to be creatures of the earth [ Japanese don't have that in mind, but perhaps ],
  • not biological in design ( robot? or reptile? ), so skinny / can see the bones ,
  • strongly acidic body fluids ,
    ...(...There are a few characters that don't fit though...looks like there's a different reason.)

Updated

gloomy_wing said:
...(...There are a few characters that don't fit though...looks like there's a different reason.)

It's likely as simple as traits unknown in to (real or mythological) Earth life + statement of foreign origin.
It's too open to interpretation: If you try to define it further you'll encounter more argument, because everyone's opinion will be a little different.

  • Mollusks == Octopus and Squid in the sense that they don't seem to be creatures of the earth [ Japanese don't have that in mind, but perhaps ]

In the English West I think that mostly comes from H.P. Lovecraft, though I think he saw his monsters and gods differently than the way we think of "space aliens" today. Even if some of his stories went into space, it was more fantasy-like than science-fiction space travel.
Or maybe it just died out in the mid-century when it was hard to make TV costumes with tentacles.

Also Japan is one of the most-coastal culture groups in the world, it's only natural that sea creature traits are less "alien"

magnuseffect said:It's likely as....

Then , I'd be better off considering an interpretation that could be applied up to the current, not too broad.

  • elongated head ( motif of genital ), the shape of the skull
  • sometimes don't have a nose/eyes/ears , eyes without an Iris ( like a marble ) , number of eyes and feet ,
  • tough outer skin ( like a silicon resin? )
  • not biological in design ( Like robot? or reptile? )..... protrusions in some places , skinny ...

Maybe this is still too broad, I don't know if it's correct. And Maybe there are other different characteristics.

Updated

  • 1