Topic: Tag Implication: kirby -> alien

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

what if someone posts a pic of humanized kirby? that cannot be tagged as alien.

Updated by anonymous

Mutisija said:
what if someone posts a pic of humanized kirby? that cannot be tagged as alien.

Animals are humanized all the time (furries, aka the whole point of this site), and are still referred to by their animal base. I don't see why there should be a distinction here

Updated by anonymous

Zest said:
Animals are humanized all the time (furries, aka the whole point of this site), and are still referred to by their animal base. I don't see why there should be a distinction here

humanizing means that you draw a non human thing as human. thats a different from drawing anthros, catgirls and such.

just like this humanized pony doesnt get pony tag

Updated by anonymous

Mutisija said:
humanizing means that you draw a non human thing as human. thats a different from drawing anthros, catgirls and such.

just like this humanized pony doesnt get pony tag

Fair argument. It may be rather difficult to humanize kirby, though, since he lacks much definitive features. Also, looking at the kirby tag, no humanized kirbys have been posted yet, so humanized kirbys would be an anomaly (unlike mlp, where humanization is very common). Plus, alien isn't so much a species you can identify as it is a concept: not from Earth, from outer space, etc.

Updated by anonymous

Zest said:
It may be rather difficult to humanize kirby, though, since he lacks much definitive features.

but humanizing kirby is not impossible

Zest said:
Also, looking at the kirby tag, no humanized kirbys have been posted yet

the fact that there is no humanized kirby posts yet doesnt mean that there wont ever be

Zest said:
alien isn't so much a species you can identify as it is a concept: not from Earth, from outer space, etc.

if it looks like a normal human, its does not get alien tag because that would break tag what you see rule.

Updated by anonymous

Mutisija said:
but humanizing kirby is not impossible

What I meant to say is that it would be hard to tell that a human caricature is actually kirby humanized. Without the context of the kirby plushies in that photo, I personally wouldn't have seen the human as a humanized kirby, to illustrate what I mean. If you could refer to an image of a humanized kirby that doesnt rely on explicit references to the series, this point would hold more ground.

Mutisija said:
the fact that there is no humanized kirby posts yet doesnt mean that there wont ever be

Yes, I agree. I brought this point up because I saw that it would be by far more useful to have kirby implicated with alien, at least according to what e6's sample of pictures says.

Mutisija said:
if it looks like a normal human, its does not get alien tag because that would break tag what you see rule.

That's the thing... There have been a few copyrights with aliens that look identical to humans. Take dragon ball (the sayians look identical to humans sans the tail, and many characters are portrayed without the tails anyway) and futurama (amazonians, osirians, vincians, etc).

What does an alien look like to you? Does it have to be green with big head? Does it have to ooze slime? These don't necessarily imply aliens. If you have to point out a distinct feature to say it's an alien, that's, for lack of a better word referring to species, racist.

There's also that contradictory rule, tag what is implied, that weakens your assertion of this point (if you see two guys in anal position buttnaked, but don't see genitals, it would still be tagged as sex, gay, anal, and marked as explicit, etc).

Updated by anonymous

  • 1