No, this isn't a BUR for a change - the gabby_(disambiguation) alias has already been made. I've just spent a bit of time cleaning it out, and for once I managed to find citations of ownership for every character in the search results, and even a few pre-existing tags.

The one exception is this character:

post #1726572

Currently, the tag consists only of 74 posts of that particular Gardevoir, and I cannot find out anything about it whatsoever. All clues lead to dead ends or "Commissioned by Anonymous". And yet, if the chatter I encountered along the way in e621 comments and Twitter replies is anything to go by, this character is quite well known (as you might hope, with this much art).

Does anyone have any ideas for what the canonical character tag should be? The owner apparently prefers to remain secretive. The only halfway interesting lead I found was this Twitter user who appears to draw Gabby a fair bit, including some pictures not in those search results, without ever stating that they were commissioned by someone else. But even that isn't definitive. (Their tag on here is normana, for what that's worth.)

If the creator wishes to remain anonymous, it's probably not a good idea to spend a lot of time trying to research the character owner. I'd probably just make the tag something like gabby_(anonymous), or maybe use the species like gabby_(gardevoir)?

faucet said:
If the creator wishes to remain anonymous, it's probably not a good idea to spend a lot of time trying to research the character owner. I'd probably just make the tag something like gabby_(anonymous), or maybe use the species like gabby_(gardevoir)?

It's not unrealistic for another Gabby to pop up who's a Gardevoir or who belongs to an anonymous person, so those tags aren't the best for futureproofing. With that said I can't think of any better options beyond hassling someone who wants to be anonymous.

strikerman said:
It's not unrealistic for another Gabby to pop up who's a Gardevoir or who belongs to an anonymous person, so those tags aren't the best for futureproofing. With that said I can't think of any better options beyond hassling someone who wants to be anonymous.

Yeah, it's not ideal, but what can really be done otherwise? It's likely for another Gabby to pop up who's a Gardevoir, but what's the chance of that person also wanting to remain completely anonymous?

strikerman said:
It's not unrealistic for another Gabby to pop up who's a Gardevoir or who belongs to an anonymous person, so those tags aren't the best for futureproofing. With that said I can't think of any better options beyond hassling someone who wants to be anonymous.

Just like anonymous_artist, if someone wants to remain anonymous, their stuff isn't going to be easily identifiable. I think it's realistic that an anonymous person's generically-named character would lack a unique character tag, like an anonymous person's art lacks a unique artist tag.

strikerman said:
It's not unrealistic for another Gabby to pop up who's a Gardevoir or who belongs to an anonymous person, so those tags aren't the best for futureproofing. With that said I can't think of any better options beyond hassling someone who wants to be anonymous.

Indeed, I tried searching Twitter for "gabby gardevoir" before posting this thread and the only results were for multiple other Gardevoirs named Gabby.

I was really hoping, if the character was indeed well-known, that somebody might be more familiar with her backstory than I am.

wat8548 said:
I was really hoping, if the character was indeed well-known, that somebody might be more familiar with her backstory than I am.

That actually makes me wonder. How do we know her name is Gabby, if her owner is anonymous? Her owner is the only one with authority to declare her name, so it would have to be traceable to someone. Or is this now a "public domain" character, a character design that the public has picked up and named for itself, now completely separated from her original owner?

watsit said:
Or is this now a "public domain" character, a character design that the public has picked up and named for itself, now completely separated from her original owner?

seize the means of gardevoir hentai

Might have the best luck directly messaging people who seem familiar with the character (on e6 posts' comments and the like).

strikerman said:
Might have the best luck directly messaging people who seem familiar with the character (on e6 posts' comments and the like).

Though unless it's traced to an owner, that would be hear-say. Anyone can post art of a character they managed to get a hold of, claim to know her owner and say her name is "Gabby" without the original owner saying so. And if the owner wants to remain anonymous, they couldn't speak up and correct the misinfo without outing themselves (or maybe they tried without being too public about it, but everyone already took to the name Gabby).

watsit said:
That actually makes me wonder. How do we know her name is Gabby, if her owner is anonymous? Her owner is the only one with authority to declare her name, so it would have to be traceable to someone. Or is this now a "public domain" character, a character design that the public has picked up and named for itself, now completely separated from her original owner?

Oh, I found multiple sources giving her name as Gabby (example), just not a single one giving a name to her commissioner.

The bulk update request #3751 is active.

mass update gabby_(disambiguation) -> gabby_(gardevoir)

Reason: A 75th image of the same character has now been posted.

Any objections to this, at least until it causes a problem and/or we think of a better solution?

EDIT: The bulk update request #3751 (forum #352990) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

The bulk update request #3751 (forum #352990) has been approved by @gattonero2001.

siggggggggggg said:
New update to this. superix recently posted a piece of art of Gabby_(gardevoir) crediting DocBats as the commissioner. Piece can be found here
Docbats seems to also have posted Gabby in response to other artist's posts such as here
Upon doing some more "investigation" (if you can call a twitter search that) I found another piece of Gabby where the commissioner is Docbats linked here
This seems to be somewhat conclusive to show gabby is owned by docbats. I've made a bulk update request here (I don't know how to directly link to update requests with dtext.
I would like to note that archiving the original tweet linked (piece by superix) is not possible to my knowledge as archive.org and other websites are prventted from doing so.

Now do Elle pls

The bulk update request #4699 (forum #364284) has been rejected by @Siggggggggggg.