Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The tag alias #60783 etis -> etis_(disambiguation) has been rejected.
Reason: etis is too generic of a name, this tag has several very different characters.
EDIT: The tag alias etis -> etis_(disambiguation) (forum #355322) has been approved by @gattonero2001.
Updated by auto moderator
The tag alias etis -> etis_(disambiguation) (forum #355322) has been approved by @gattonero2001.
I think this may have been in error, or at least excessive. The etis tag may superficially appear to have several very different characters, but in practice, when you click on all of them, you find that all of them have been commissioned by the same person: an e621 and Inkbunny user named Etis, whose fursona of the same name takes many different forms. As characters are TWYK, we can't tag the forms differently if they all have the same canonical name.
The main common element uniting all the forms is a distinctive marking, usually resembling a broken diamond with vertical lines extending from the top and bottom.
Here you can see such a marking on the body of a white male anthro fox:
On the forehead of a yellow and white herm cat taur:
On the forehead of a yellow and black male feral eastern dragon:
On the forehead of an orange, white and blue herm anthro fox:
On the forehead of an orange and yellow male cub avali:
And so on and so forth, for all kinds of forms, genders, species, and ages:
post #2233172 post #3417321 post #2413042 post #3607491
This one is interesting, because there is a second mark on the front haunch:
This provides the missing link to prove that a second set of characters is indeed also the same Etis. For example, in the following images (all tagged by Etis himself), only the spiral is visible:
Sometimes one or both markings are partially obscured, but they're there:
Even when you don't otherwise have anything to go on, you can still deduce from other posts. For example, there are no visible markings in this post:
But it is clearly the same character as seen from a more helpful angle here:
In this one the forehead diamond is only barely visible, but the uploader and owner of the other character has posted five other pictures which are unambiguously Etis:
Some early pictures have a different shaped marking:
Of course, the final arbiter of whether a character is a character is the character's owner. Which brings us onto stuff like this:
post #2528291 post #2089720 post #962559 post #2009114
In conclusion, I was not able to find a single instance of this tag being ambiguous. I even checked every entry in the removal log, and so far not a single instance of the disambiguation tag has been replaced with anything but etis_(etis). Even in cases like post #2860318, where the strongest evidence is that one of the other characters has appeared with Etis in a bunch of other posts, I would not feel confident tagging anything else.
Unless somebody can provide a conclusive counterexample, I think this should be reversed.
(BTW, Etis is currently the fifth most-used invalid tag on the site.)
Then perhaps "etis" should be a copyright tag? All of these image depict completely different characters that share no features in common other than the commissioner.
A tag that covers all of the mentioned images does not make sense as a character tag, because it's not a character, it's just whatever this commissioner feels like.
Updated
aaronfranke said:
Then perhaps "etis" should be a copyright tag? All of these image depict completely different characters that share no features in common other than the commissioner.
We don't tag character owners or commissioners. But wat8548 did point out common features/marks on the character, which would make it more in line with being the same character but alternate_species (or if the character has no canonical species, just that character however the owner wants to portray them today; it's not terribly unusual for a personal character to be a different species given the whims of the creator).
aaronfranke said:
Then perhaps "etis" should be a copyright tag? All of these image depict completely different characters that share no features in common other than the commissioner.A tag that covers all of the mentioned images does not make sense as a character tag, because it's not a character, it's just whatever this commissioner feels like.
Apart from the fact that I specifically pointed out which features they share in common, characters are TWYK and always have been. If the commissioner says they have many different forms while still being the same character, then it shall be so. We've had too many controversies over characters who canonically have only one form being tagged differently depending on the post to get picky about visible attributes now.
The bulk update request #4071 is active.
remove alias etis (432) -> etis_(disambiguation) (0)
Reason:
wat8548 said:
Unless somebody can provide a conclusive counterexample, I think this should be reversed.
Well, it's been nearly two weeks and nobody has produced one.
update etis_(disambiguation) -> etis update etis_(etis) -> etis
EDIT: The bulk update request #4071 (forum #356691) has been approved by @gattonero2001.
Updated by auto moderator
The bulk update request #4071 (forum #356691) has been approved by @gattonero2001.
