How would TWYS species tags work when you have things like:

Non-canid species with knots, like skunks and squirrels (and dogs with barbs, bulls and deer with horsecocks etc)
Fennecs and arctic foxes with red fox socks.
Artists that draw Panthera cats with big pointy canine ears

Would TWYS require these to be tagged as hybrids?

kevsnowcat said:
Non-canid species with knots, like skunks and squirrels (and dogs with barbs, bulls and deer with horsecocks etc)

First, tag the corresponding species type based on how they look overall; e.g., dog, deer, squirrel, etc.
Second, tag the corresponding animal_penis type based on how their penises look; e.g., knot/canine_penis, barbed_penis/feline_penis, flared_penis/equine_penis, etc.
Don't tag as hybrid.

Fennecs and arctic foxes with red fox socks.

See also: topic #32715

IIRC, species are still tagged regardless if they appear as characters or in objects (such as on clothing or paintings), with the only exception being if the object has a dedicated name attached to it; e.g., teddy_bear (toy bear), blahaj (IKEA toy shark), froggy_chair (frog chair), etc.

Artists that draw Panthera cats with big pointy canine ears

Would TWYS require these to be tagged as hybrids?

If it is still identifiable as its base species, then tag it as such (i.e., panthera only).
If it looks significantly different from its base species and looks like a hybrid, then tag it as such with the component species involved (i.e., panthera canine hybrid).

Additionally, you may also add in the corresponding ear type; e.g., canine_ears, feline_ears, etc.
The hybrid tag should only be used when the character looks significantly different from its base species.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Additionally, you may also add in the corresponding ear type; e.g., canine_ears, feline_ears, etc.

Those tags are only supposed to be used for (kemomimi) humanoids. A wolf humanoid being tagged with canine_ears and/or canine_tail, etc. Anthros and ferals shouldn't use the _ears or _tail tags.

watsit said:
Those tags are only supposed to be used for (kemomimi) humanoids. A wolf humanoid being tagged with canine_ears and/or canine_tail, etc. Anthros and ferals shouldn't use the _ears or _tail tags.

Huh, didn't know about that since it wasn't mentioned in the wikis. I was hesitant to even suggest it in the first place due to the lack of a wiki and the questionable tag validity.
Normally, I wouldn't even tag the animal ears or tail type, only sticking to the descriptive shape tags such as prick_ears, floppy_ears, etc.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Huh, didn't know about that since it wasn't mentioned in the wikis. I was hesitant to even suggest it in the first place due to the lack of a wiki and the questionable tag validity.

Yeah, it's very intermittently mentioned. Wolf tail has a mention of it. Many used to implicate humanoid, but those implications were removed because of rampant mistags on anthros causing humanoid to be mistagged.

thegreatwolfgang said:
See also: topic #32715

IIRC, species are still tagged regardless if they appear as characters or in objects (such as on clothing or paintings), with the only exception being if the object has a dedicated name attached to it; e.g., teddy_bear (toy bear), blahaj (IKEA toy shark), froggy_chair (frog chair), etc.

I actually meant socks_(marking). Fennecs and arctics don't have black paws/ears/tailtip and the black comma markings under their whiskers. If they have these markings that's significantly different from the base species. A lot of artists draw them this way though, either from not doing any research or finding a monochrome species boring to draw.

kevsnowcat said:
I actually meant socks_(marking). Fennecs and arctics don't have black paws/ears/tailtip and the black comma markings under their whiskers. If they have these markings that's significantly different from the base species. A lot of artists draw them this way though, either from not doing any research or finding a monochrome species boring to draw.

We don't normally care for markings or fur/colour patterns when tagging a character's species (exceptions with zebras, tigers, etc).
Heck, we can have rainbow coloured fur or tiger stripes on foxes, but we still tag them based on their signature features.
Fennecs typically have big ears and small bodies, while arctics have bushy (normally white) fur coat and a long, fluffy tail.

If they are so vastly different from their base species, then try going broad and tag one level above, such as canine/canis, vulpine/vulpes, etc.

thegreatwolfgang said:
We don't normally care for markings or fur/colour patterns when tagging a character's species (exceptions with zebras, tigers, etc).
Heck, we can have rainbow coloured fur or tiger stripes on foxes, but we still tag them based on their signature features.
Fennecs typically have big ears and small bodies, while arctics have bushy (normally white) fur coat and a long, fluffy tail.

If they are so vastly different from their base species, then try going broad and tag one level above, such as canine/canis, vulpine/vulpes, etc.

OK. I actually think wild colors actually fit in more than artists just not having a clue. Pics like this, I've seen fur farm rescued red foxes in videos on YT that have markings exactly like this. Some artists at least draw the body shape (fluffier, small ears, bigger tail, etc), but to me this just looks like a red fox. I know it's being picky, but ever since a friend pointed out the sheer number of arctic foxes drawn badly that weren't tagged so he couldn't filter them out (he doesn't have an account) I've been wondering the best way to fix it (so far just adding socks_(marking) tag) https://e621.net/posts/171877