The bulk update request #2011 is pending approval.

create alias nameless_character (434) -> unnamed_character (586)

Reason: Both tags refer to the same concept, but unnamed_character is used slightly more often.

Do we really need a unified unnamed character tag for every single post with an unnamed character?

Normally if a character appears in a post and is unnamed, I would not make a character tag for them.
Unless they start to appear in 2 or more posts, in which case I would go with the generic character:unnamed_(artist_name) formula.

Yeah, I think it would make more sense for both of these to be invalidated

thegreatwolfgang said:
Do we really need a unified unnamed character tag for every single post with an unnamed character?

Normally if a character appears in a post and is unnamed, I would not make a character tag for them.
Unless they start to appear in 2 or more posts, in which case I would go with the generic character:unnamed_(artist_name) formula.

It seems that it’s been used for canonical minor characters from franchises that never gave them names, and these characters may be so minor that it may not be worthwhile to create a unique tag for them as they may never appear in any artwork again. In fact, some people might find it useful to search specifically for art of characters bordering on obscurity, as in, ”wow, someone actually yiffed that unnamed zebra thing that only appeared for a single panel in OPM??“

cloudpie said:
Yeah, I think it would make more sense for both of these to be invalidated

I'd prefer to have one alias to the other and then have it in the invalid category, not to alias both to invalid tag.

scaliespe said:
It seems that it’s been used for canonical minor characters from franchises that never gave them names, and these characters may be so minor that it may not be worthwhile to create a unique tag for them as they may never appear in any artwork again. In fact, some people might find it useful to search specifically for art of characters bordering on obscurity, as in, ”wow, someone actually yiffed that unnamed zebra thing that only appeared for a single panel in OPM??“

Still, it could be named as unnamed_(franchise) rather than one general tag.
In the case with post #2163698, people have already started calling her "monster girl" ^{[1] [2] [3]} , so a potential character tag could be unnamed_monster_girl_(one-punch_man).

thegreatwolfgang said:
Still, it could be named as unnamed_(franchise) rather than one general tag.
In the case with post #2163698, people have already started calling her "monster girl" ^{[1] [2] [3]} , so a potential character tag could be unnamed_monster_girl_(one-punch_man).

There are other examples under that tag that don’t even have a fan name, and apparently haven’t even been drawn more than once.

Though, giving that character a specific tag is not mutually exclusive with what I’m suggesting. The character is still officially unnamed, so unnamed_character is still accurate. The point is, what if you want to find specifically obscure characters? I’ve noticed some results under background character are attempts to do that; that is, people have used the tag to say “this is a drawing of an unimportant background character from x franchise” without realizing the purpose of the tag. This, I think, would be the same thing, except it’s not appropriating an existing tag. background_character solo -comic has several examples of that buried among solo mistags. But this could still be a useful thing to have a tag for, no?

That being said, there might be a better name to encapsulate this concept, considering that some such characters might have actually been given canon names at some point, despite being literal background characters. Undertale comes to mind.

I'm gonna add my vote to the "alias then invalidate" pile. Correct procedure when drawing an officially nameless character is to give them a sufficiently unambiguous placeholder name, like incineroar_dad_(zourik) or unnamed_lynx_sister_(black-kitten). Clunky as it is, it works for searching and blacklisting which is all that matters, whereas a unified tag for every unnamed character in every franchise ever to exist absolutely does not.

scaliespe said:
background character

Why is there a background_character tag now? All of these just seem like placement tags for when there is a official naming of a character, and even then background_character looks to describe any additional character in a solo_focus or duo_focus relationship.

Regardless, I'm still skeptical with keeping either of these tags, but I'm going to agree with the alias first then see if it's worth placing in the Invalid category later like @Furrin_Gok suggested.