Topic: alternate_species & similar -> Lore

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

Before I request the BUR I wanted some feedback:
alternate_species is basically "character is normally drawn as X, while here they're drawn as Y", which isn't TWYS by definition.
You could argue that the same applies to furrification, humanized, humanoidized, ponification and dragonification because they already imply alternate_species, but I'm not sure about them.
Lore might also apply to the alternate_form family of tags, but I'm not sure here either.

Stupid example: well-known characters
Better example: random characters

You do have a point. The tags you mentioned are pretty much referring to characters who are different from their “usual”/“canonical” form or species. By definition they fall outside the TWYS rule, because you cannot tell just by visuals that it’s an alternate form/species of the original (unless you put two of the same character in different forms side to side).

Converting them into lore tags sounds good.

This would need to be a 2-step BUR...

1. Remove everything

unimply humanized -> human
unimply humanized -> alternate_species

unalias kemonomimi_mode -> humanoidized
unimply humanoidized -> humanoid
unimply humanoidized -> alternate_species

unalias furrified -> furrification
unimply furrification -> alternate_species

unimply dragonification -> dragon
unimply dragonification -> alternate_species

unalias alternative_species -> alternate_species
unalias species_swap -> alternate_species

2. Rename and re-add everything

alias humanized -> humanized_(lore)
imply humanized_(lore) -> human
imply humanized_(lore) -> alternate_species_(lore)
category humanized_(lore) -> lore

alias humanoidized -> humanoidized_(lore)
alias kemonomimi_mode -> humanoidized_(lore)
imply humanoidized_(lore) -> humanoid
imply humanoidized_(lore) -> alternate_species_(lore)
category humanoidized_(lore) -> lore

alias furrification -> furrification_(lore)
alias furrified -> furrification_(lore)
imply furrification_(lore) -> alternate_species_(lore)
category furrification_(lore) -> lore

alias dragonification -> dragonification_(lore)
imply dragonification_(lore) -> dragon
imply dragonification_(lore) -> alternate_species_(lore)
category dragonification_(lore) -> lore

alias alternate_species -> alternate_species_(lore)
alias alternative_species -> alternate_species_(lore)
alias species_swap -> alternate_species_(lore)
category alternate_species_(lore) -> lore

About ponification: it currently does not imply alternate_species nor alternate_form, probably because it depends on the character: if it originally is an equine character then it'd be alternate_form, otherwise it'd be alternate_species.
I'll put it in the lore category anyway, but in another BUR.
I still don't know what to do about the alternate_form group of tags

Also, I'd need to actually create the *_(lore) tags before this works

Updated

watsit said:
Incidentally, tags like brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, brothers, sisters, brother_and_sister, mother_and_daughter, father_and_son, etc, aren't lore, even though familial relations aren't a visible trait. You can't tell these two characters are siblings any more than these two, by looking at them.

I agree, they should be changed as well.
Every lore tag must end in _(lore) though, so for every tag we have to do the unalias-unimply-rename-realias-reimply dance

shadyguy said:
I agree, they should be changed as well.
Every lore tag must end in _(lore) though, so for every tag we have to do the unalias-unimply-rename-realias-reimply dance

That’s quite the ride the tags have to go through 😁, but at the end of the day they will make more sense once they are categorized as “lore” tags.

watsit said:
Incidentally, tags like brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, brothers, sisters, brother_and_sister, mother_and_daughter, father_and_son, etc, aren't lore, even though familial relations aren't a visible trait. You can't tell these two characters are siblings any more than these two, by looking at them.

Yes, that was what I was talking about (I thought it was more obvious than that). The main problem here is that there's no umbrella tag (incest can't be used as one for obvious reasons), so you can't easily use an automated tool and be sure you've caught everything. While we're tracking down all of these tags, we should create a relative_(lore) tag and imply all of them, including incest_(lore), to it. I found a wiki page called tag group:character_relations, but even that says it's non-exhaustive. (Also, which joker added pantsing to the "Other" section at the bottom?)

BTW, check out the hellish list of aliases for grandparent_and_grandchild. Was all of that really necessary?

The bulk update request #1508 is pending approval.

remove implication humanized (3770) -> human (374648)
remove implication humanized (3770) -> alternate_species (36523)
remove alias kemonomimi_mode (0) -> humanoidized (7296)
remove implication humanoidized (7296) -> humanoid (451733)
remove implication humanoidized (7296) -> alternate_species (36523)
remove alias furrified (0) -> furrification (8027)
remove implication furrification (8027) -> alternate_species (36523)
remove implication dragonification (269) -> dragon (359439)
remove implication dragonification (269) -> alternate_species (36523)
remove alias alternative_species (0) -> alternate_species (36523)
remove alias species_swap (0) -> alternate_species (36523)

Reason: See topic: tags are inherently not TWYS and will get aliased to their _(lore) counterparts

Giving a thumbs up only under the concept that they will be later aliased to the same tag just suffixed with _(lore)

furrin_gok said:
Giving a thumbs up only under the concept that they will be later aliased to the same tag just suffixed with _(lore)

Obviously, see the complete BUR 8 messages above

  • 1