Topic: [REJECTED] Tag implication: aryanne_(character) -> nazi

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

zenith01234

Member

The tag implication #44323 aryanne_(character) -> nazi has been rejected.

Reason: This character is fundamentally based on being a nazi. I have "nazi" on my blacklist as I would prefer not to see such content, but not all posts featuring this character are additionally tagged with "nazi".

EDIT: The tag implication aryanne_(character) -> nazi (forum #336504) has been rejected by @bitWolfy.

Updated by auto moderator

Siral Exan

Privileged

It's possible to have this character drawn in such a way, that they don't appear to be a nazi. By TWYS, this means they shouldn't get tagged nazi (without additional contexts), and ergo this implication would not work. If you wish to avoid seeing this character, then blacklist them instead of suggesting an implication to a tag you have blacklisted.

None of these posts contain nazi imagery:
post #3349351 post #2784165 post #2379524 post #2348184 post #1687834

Drink Arngejuice

Member

scaliespe said:
Is this, like… a canon MLP character? The fuck?

no she's a fanmade character who's a nazi because the roflcopter offensive humor is quite le epic troll

Lafcadio

Janitor

Character names are tag-what-you-know, whereas most other tags, nazi included, are tag-what-you-see. This is wrong for the same reason that we don't imply characters to species (an artist doesn't have to portray Aryanne as a horse, nor do they have to portray her as having anything to do with nazis.)

zenith01234

Member

That all makes sense. Apologies for bothering you all with that suggestion which in hindsight I realize doesn't work with the tagging system.

Versperus

Moderator

scaliespe said:
Okay. Then why does this tag imply my_little_pony? Fan characters aren’t supposed to imply the franchise they’re based on, right?

there are a few old fan things that got invalid implications despite this.

Watsit

Privileged

bitwolfy said:
If I remember correctly, this is working as intended.
Fan characters imply my_little_pony, actual show characters imply friendship_is_magic / mlp_g5.

That would mean things like fakemon should imply pokemon, which they explicitly aren't supposed to. And we had that big argument/debate not too long ago about whether something drawn loosely "in the style of" some franchise should be tagged with that franchise, which would've been a moot argument if fan characters alone should be tagged with that franchise.

This would also mean that I could create something that in no way appears visually related to MLP (not even the art style), has nothing visible from the show or any other piece of media, but still claim it's an MLP fan character so any posts with it is tagged MLP. It also means a cross-franchise fan character could be made (think an unofficial Captain N), so anything with them is tagged with all those franchises, even if nothing officially from any of the franchises are visible in a given picture.

Not to mention the fan_character deimplication BUR that was approved several months back, where a bunch of "fan characters" were deimplicated from fan_character because they could be drawn in a way that doesn't depict what they're a fan character of.

Updated

RiverInADryLand

Member

As I recall, part of the reason the my_little_pony tag is used that way is as a catch-all search and blacklist tag for the mlp art style.

maplebytes

Privileged

watsit said:
That would mean things like fakemon should imply pokemon, which they explicitly aren't supposed to. And we had that big argument/debate not too long ago about whether something drawn loosely "in the style of" some franchise should be tagged with that franchise, which would've been a moot argument if fan characters alone should be tagged with that franchise.

There's a grey area for My Little Pony in particular because there are so many popular fan made characters which are inherently MLP related.

The fan characters that imply my_little_pony are ones that would simply not be tagged as those characters if they were in some way made to not be related to the My Little Pony world - characters from Fallout Equestria for example, it's a fan work that is set in the My Little Pony universe, with characters recognizable as being from that world, meaning it inherently invokes My Little Pony. Many other fan characters who are set to imply MLP are likewise, inextricably tied to the franchise in terms of theme, appearance, and connection to lore.

And as RiverInADryLand said, it's more useful for searching and blacklisting to have these tags implicate my_little_pony than it is to have users end up having to add blacklist entries piecemeal as they encounter various fan characters which will always be MLP related, I don't think someone blacklisting my_little_pony cares if the character is from a fanfic or is a brony meme character - it's all "My Little Pony".

This would also mean that I could create something that in no way appears visually related to MLP (not even the art style), has nothing visible from the show or any other piece of media, but still claim it's an MLP fan character so any posts with it is tagged MLP. It also means a cross-franchise fan character could be made (think an unofficial Captain N), so anything with them is tagged with all those franchises, even if nothing officially from any of the franchises are visible in a given picture.

I think you wouldn't have a case for getting a character like that to imply my_little_pony in a request thread. It's worth noting that the vast majority of pony OCs don't imply the my_little_pony tag, for one, it'd be extremely tedious, and two as mentioned in the thread you linked - the same character could be depicted as a different species or "de-fan-characterized" to remove any connection to the franchise they were initially based off of - a tag for the name of someone's lucario OC shouldn't imply pokemon because the character owner could later decide to make that character a fox.

Watsit

Privileged

riverinadryland said:
As I recall, part of the reason the my_little_pony tag is used that way is as a catch-all search and blacklist tag for the mlp art style.

Which is irrelevant to the discussion of fan characters implying the franchise. Characters aren't tied to art style, nor is art style exclusive to a franchise. An MLP fan character drawn more realistically and not in an "MLP art style" would still be that character, but shouldn't implicate MLP even by this logic, but according to bitWolfy, it should because it's that character.

hungrymaple said:
There's a grey area for My Little Pony in particular because there are so many popular fan made characters which are inherently MLP related.

If anything, having so many popular fan characters would be a reason to not implicate, as that increases the chance of them being used in a way that shouldn't be tagged MLP. You can't know what any of those character owners will decide to do tomorrow. Especially in the case of Aryanne who, being a troll character that spread throughout the community, doesn't even have an owner, so you couldn't claim non-MLP depictions wouldn't count as her if the owner disavows such depictions.

hungrymaple said:
The fan characters that imply my_little_pony are ones that would simply not be tagged as those characters if they were in some way made to not be related to the My Little Pony world - characters from Fallout Equestria for example, it's a fan work that is set in the My Little Pony universe, with characters recognizable as being from that world, meaning it inherently invokes My Little Pony.

That goes against all character tagging rules, which is explicitly exempt from TWYS. alternate_species, alternate_form, alternate_universe, anthrofied, humanized, etc, are all tags that exist, which are used when a character is depicted in a non-typical way. If a Fallout Equestria character is changed into a human and appears in the real modern world with a more realistic art style, it would still be that character and should still be tagged as that character, despite having nothing from MLP and not even looking like MLP.

hungrymaple said:
I think you wouldn't have a case for getting a character like that to imply my_little_pony in a request thread. It's worth noting that the vast majority of pony OCs don't imply the my_little_pony tag, for one, it'd be extremely tedious, and two as mentioned in the thread you linked - the same character could be depicted as a different species or "de-fan-characterized" to remove any connection to the franchise they were initially based off of - a tag for the name of someone's lucario OC shouldn't imply pokemon because the character owner could later decide to make that character a fox.

Which is exactly my point. If what bitWolfy said is true, then those pony OCs should imply my_little_pony, and someone's lucario OC should imply pokemon... even though the creator can at any random time in the future decide to portray the character as a different species outside of that universe. There is nothing stopping any MLP fan character from having the same done with them as what pklucario did with Ethan. This was in fact the primary point behind the aforementioned fan_character disambiguation BUR. If a character shouldn't even imply fan_character because they can be drawn in a way that separates them from the franchise they're a fan creation of, how can there be any reason to imply that same franchise they could be separated from?

maplebytes

Privileged

watsit said:
...

I'm not sure if I understand everything exactly here, but I'll try to explain why I don't think it's worth changing things (mostly).

It seems we're thinking of two different meanings of what a fan character is, and while both are valid meanings, one is more "esoteric" in terms of how that character is used and associated with the canonical property.

  • Most fan characters are straight forward "a character personally created by a fan", that fan can, at any time, decide to change that character to whatever they want
  • There are some fan characters which are more accurately described as "fandom characters", which may be initially created by a single fan, who may even "own" that character, but that character spreads and takes on a life of its own within the fandom, creating a consensus of what that character is through multiple artists' and writers' interpretations

If, like that case of ethan_(pklucario) I were to make a My Little Pony fan character named "Bob", the bob tag should never ever implicate my_little_pony - not only would implicating every random MLP fan character be asinine, on a whim I can make Bob a horse anthro, completely disassociated with My Little Pony, and I have full creative control to do so.

On the other hand, we have "fandom characters" like Aryanne here - she has no known creator, and her appearance, what this character has to be to be recognized as that character is based on group consensus, if you were to make her an anthropomorphic border collie, with no reference to her current design, nor being connected to the My Little Pony world in any way at all, you're simply not drawing Aryanne anymore, you're drawing an original character that you can call Aryanne as much as you want, but that character would not share the same tag with the pony.

Even in the case of a fan character with a known creator, this still applies. If the author of Fallout Equestria decided to write a new story and he made Littlepip into an elf living in a steampunk fantasy world, and then someone made an illustration of that character and posted it here, that elf Littlepip would need a new tag. The first Littlepip is set in stone by the existence of Fallout Equestria, you can effectively make a new character with the same name, but even as the official creator, you can't unmake the fan work that put that inherently My Little Pony related character out into the fandom, and you can't change the group consensus on what that character is.

There are some of these fan characters with only indirect tag implications, but are inextricably linked by what they are. Fan characters that are "fandom reinterpretations" like princess_molestia or raricow_(mlp) must always look like princess_celestia_(mlp) or rarity_(mlp), which implicates them to my little pony, if they weren't altered versions of those characters, tagging them as those characters, the canon or fan character, wouldn't be valid. You can't make a Raricow that isn't Rarity.

That said, there are some characters that currently imply my_little_pony that clearly shouldn't, for example, poison_trail or moonbrush_(phathusa), these two are both personal fan characters, and there are multiple pieces of art where they're completely disassociated from My Little Pony.

spe

Admin

Now that you mention it, this does seem to be the case with other franchises as well. katia_managan, for example, implies prequel_adventure which implies the_elder_scrolls. Normally, The Elder Scrolls would be implied by her species (Khajiit) anyway, but say you drew her as an alternate_species and with no other visible references to TES - either the post is still tagged the elder scrolls due to the character’s irrevocable association with the franchise (despite being a fan creation), or you’re simply not drawing the recognizable Prequel character anymore, but something else with the same name. Either way, removing the prequel_adventure -> the_elder_scrolls implication would be impractical as Prequel is inherently Elder Scrolls-related. In that sense, I can understand the current implications.

The distinction between a “fan character” and a “fandom character” is interesting, and something I hadn’t considered before.

Watsit

Privileged

hungrymaple said:
There are some fan characters which are more accurately described as "fandom characters", which may be initially created by a single fan, who may even "own" that character, but that character spreads and takes on a life of its own within the fandom, creating a consensus of what that character is through multiple artists' and writers' interpretations

I don't think we want to go down that rabbit hole. Just need to look at Derpy to see how messy that can get. An unnamed and otherwise unremarkable background character in a momentary shot of the show that had an apparent animation error causing a misplaced eye, fans creating a whole character whose primary trait is that misplaced eye, then the show incorporating that character, then deciding the character's name is actually Muffins. Are Derpy and Muffins really the same character? How can you know for sure who Derpy is?

hungrymaple said:
On the other hand, we have "fandom characters" like Aryanne here - she has no known creator, and her appearance, what this character has to be to be recognized as that character is based on group consensus, if you were to make her an anthropomorphic border collie, with no reference to her current design, nor being connected to the My Little Pony world in any way at all, you're simply not drawing Aryanne anymore, you're drawing an original character that you can call Aryanne as much as you want, but that character would not share the same tag with the pony.

I would say this is the other way around. The character has no owner to dictate who is or isn't her. If I draw character that may or may not look like other depictions other people have made of Aryanne, I would have just as much authority as anyone else to say it is or isn't her, if not more authority since it is my creation that came from my head (i.e. lore, what the character tags work on; just as someone else couldn't say a character's not trans_man_(lore) if the image creator says it is, someone else can't say it isn't that character if the image creator says it is). This is the point of the alternate_* tags, to indicate when a character is depicted abnormally. And either way, a group consensus of this sort is what you get by just having it out there, letting time pass, and making a gut call based on your experience or feeling, it's not something you can test on demand and get a consistent answer every time. It's also not like a group consensus means a unanimous agreement, so even if you could poll it, you'll have some saying it is and some saying it isn't, with a different consensus based on who exactly you asked (susceptible to sampling bias). So a tag based on "group consensus" can't work.

hungrymaple said:
Even in the case of a fan character with a known creator, this still applies. If the author of Fallout Equestria decided to write a new story and he made Littlepip into an elf living in a steampunk fantasy world, and then someone made an illustration of that character and posted it here, that elf Littlepip would need a new tag.

That's not how it works. That's essentially what happened to Ethan, who was created as a Pokemon fan character, and his creator decided to make a version of him that's a fox and had illustrations made of him that have nothing to do with Pokemon, and it's still the same character tag because it's the same character according to the creator. This is exactly the point behind the fan_character deimplication BUR, because this kind of thing always has the potential to happen to any non-official character, that the same character tag can be used in a way not associated with the franchise they were originally made as a fan of. There's also that recent alias request for Reina, a character from the Mutton Chop series who the creator of said character decided is no longer part of that setting, and the tag is being updated/renamed to reflect it. Notably, it's not having a new tag created for the non-MC character separate from the original MC character, the same tag is used to refer to both depictions of the character because it's the same character, just in different settings.

We're not talking about company-owned franchise characters here. Even if they first appeared in a collaborative work like Fallout Equestria, these are all still personal characters created by individuals, so they are not tied to that work if the character owner decides to do something else with them. See Juniper Wolff and Ian Veldime as examples here, characters that first appeared as part of the Wanderlust setting along with a bunch of other collaborators' characters, but after some happenings, the owners of those two characters left the project and they're now used outside of the setting by their owners (at least Juniper Wolff; not sure what happened to Ian as there doesn't seem to be any post-Wanderlust art of him, but that split was apparently pretty messy so it's not something I'd pry for details about). The Wanderlust creators, for their part, decided to proactively change characters in their setting to make them separate from their previous collaborators' characters, but that was their choice to change the characters in their work.

If you want to get to that level of tie-in to a franchise that they can't be separated from it, start looking at things like Them's Fightin' Herds where there is company backing of ownership and rights. Short of that, these are personal characters whose owners can decide what they want to do with, and where to take, their own characters.

hungrymaple said:
The first Littlepip is set in stone by the existence of Fallout Equestria, you can effectively make a new character with the same name, but even as the official creator, you can't unmake the fan work that put that inherently My Little Pony related character out into the fandom, and you can't change the group consensus on what that character is.

It's not about unmaking the fan work, it's about making new work different from the old. This is like saying "the first Juniper Wolff is set in stone by the existence of Wanderlust, you can effectively make a new character with the same name, but even as the official creator, you can't unmake the fan work that put that inherently Wanderlust related character out into the fandom, and you can't change the group consensus on what that character is." That's ridiculous, the owner of a character has every right to separate them from what they were once part of. And if a character doesn't have an owner, they are effectively public domain and no one can say who the character is or isn't, what they are or aren't part of.

Updated

  • 1