There are many tags which are used in combination with the transformation tag to provide details about the nature of the transformation.
There are tags which clarify what trait of a character is being changed like species_transformation, gender_transformation, and size_transformation
There are tags which clarify both what a character is before they transform and what they transform into like all the tags on the transformation tables in the transformation wiki.
There are tags which clarify the details surrounding the transformation like consensual_transformation and lust_transformation
There are tags which clarify what a character is transformed into like goo_transformation, cock_transformation, robotization and furrification.
There are tags which clarify the cause of a transformation like transformation_through_sex, and goo_transformation
Though they are less common, there are tags which clarify what a character is before they transform like reverse_robotization.
While not always transformation, there are also tags which clarify a role or presentation that a character gains like feminization, bimbofication and dronification
And of course there are others that don't fit into any of these categories.

You may have noticed that goo_transformation is listed twice. This is where the problem begins. The majority of these tags are ambiguous about what they refer to. As an example,lust_transformation could just as easily refer to the cause of the transformation. Without checking, can you guess if suit_transformation refers to characters being transformed by suits, or being transformed into living suits? What about clothing_transformation? Does foot_transformation refer to a character's feet transforming, or a character transforming into a foot? What about breast_transformation? Both of these pairs have the same naming pattern, but refer to opposite effects. It's not just the blank_transformation tags that have this problem. objectification could refer to a character transforming into an object, but according to it's wiki, is only supposed to be used for characters in the role of an object. Despite that you'll find many posts in objectification that should only be in inanimate_transformation. In the worst cases like goo_transformation there is no attempt to create the separation between transformation into a goo creature and transformation caused by goo. These ambiguities have also lead to the creation of duplicate tags robotification. Due to the extra friction using these tags has, many of these tag are under applied, for example cowification has only 3 pages despite being an incredibly popular theme in transformation.

Because of this, I think it would be valuable for the wiki to recognize these categories of tags and to create a standard for how transformation tags should be named. Splitting the wiki into these categories should make finding the most popular tag for a specific scenario much easier, which should help taggers apply them correctly, and help searchers find tags they may not have used otherwise. Right now the wiki loosely follows some of these categories with the transformation tables and the "Transformation reasons" section. Creating a standard for tag names would be much more difficult, and would require many aliases and bulk updates. Deciding on a standard that can catch most edge cases is also hard. It's far from perfect, but the following could be a good starting point for discussion.

for tags that clarify a trait of a character that is being changed.

for tags that clarify a character's both before and after a transformation. form_transformation tags already follow this pattern. gender_transformation tags abbreviate this pattern, so they would need to be changed.

for tags that clarify details surrounding the transformation. This is far from perfect, and I much would prefer something better.

for tags that clarify the cause of a transformation. I like this format because it cannot be confused with the other categories, and because there are already many tags using it.

Tags that clarify what a character is before they transform are already uncommon. I don't think they need a naming pattern at this time.

The biggest problem is tags that clarify what a character is transformed into and tags clarify a role or presentation that a character gains, since I cannot think of anything other than *ification and *ization for both, and those two formats are similar enough that I would expect them to cause confusion, in addition to causing a lot of awkward tag names for whichever category gets *ization

Thoughts and input are appreciated, I doubt I have the best solution to these problems.

oozeenthusiast said:
Does foot_transformation refer to a character's feet transforming, or a character transforming into a foot?

Ah, the object_vore conundrum. I'm sure there are other groups of tags with similar problems.

The only notable effort to fix such ambiguities that I can remember was back when the *_domination tags got split up into dominant_* and submissive_*. It was a massive and painful but ultimately worthwhile transition. Large-scale projects usually require one sufficiently motivated individual to take charge, otherwise the problem just festers indefinitely. I've learned the hard way that just asking for ideas for BURs is unlikely to produce much in the way of debate in itself, as opposed to just proposing a BUR.

All I can think of right now is that cowification is a horrible name for a tag, not just because of the confusion with objectification. I'm not sure if we're officially supposed to have tags for specific species transformations, as opposed to just tagging species_transformation and the target species in the appropriate section. On one hand this would make it hard to tell the difference between humans turning into cows and cows turning into dragons, but on the other, the number of species-specific tags required to cover everything is explosive. We do already have established tags for weirdly-specific transformation fetishes such as blueberry_inflation, but where to draw the line between a concept so common not having a tag for it becomes a nuisance, and a concept sufficiently uncommon that nobody knows what the tag for it is?

wat8548 said:
Ah, the object_vore conundrum. I'm sure there are other groups of tags with similar problems.

The only notable effort to fix such ambiguities that I can remember was back when the *_domination tags got split up into dominant_* and submissive_*. It was a massive and painful but ultimately worthwhile transition. Large-scale projects usually require one sufficiently motivated individual to take charge, otherwise the problem just festers indefinitely. I've learned the hard way that just asking for ideas for BURs is unlikely to produce much in the way of debate in itself, as opposed to just proposing a BUR.

All I can think of right now is that cowification is a horrible name for a tag, not just because of the confusion with objectification. I'm not sure if we're officially supposed to have tags for specific species transformations, as opposed to just tagging species_transformation and the target species in the appropriate section. On one hand this would make it hard to tell the difference between humans turning into cows and cows turning into dragons, but on the other, the number of species-specific tags required to cover everything is explosive. We do already have established tags for weirdly-specific transformation fetishes such as blueberry_inflation, but where to draw the line between a concept so common not having a tag for it becomes a nuisance, and a concept sufficiently uncommon that nobody knows what the tag for it is?

I would love to put forward a BUR now, but I'm not certain enough in any naming pattern to suggest one. Maybe I could start with a BUR adressing just one category, but I don't think that would actually help. The only ones I'm confident on changing are already clear. You are right, cowification isn't catchy at all, and I want to avoid anything that leads to tag names like that. A long stranded like transformation_into_cow is about just as bad. It'd be even worse for the role tags. becoming_feminine cannot replace feminization. It just isn't as good.

At the very least I'm probably going to reorganize the transformation wiki. The sections should be more clearly separated and should be explained rather than their definition being left mostly to the context of which tags are in them. There's a handful of tags that are in the wrong sections too. (some of which are my fault)

It seems like most taggers have that apprehension around species transformation tags. Specific species tags all have really low usage compared to even niche specific transformation tags that aren't directly related to species. I won't deny that it would be a massive undertaking, but I think that the benefit from species transformation tags would be very significant. Transformation is one of the most popular tags on the site, but one of the most important details relevant to any transformation is untagged in most posts.

oozeenthusiast said:
I would love to put forward a BUR now, but I'm not certain enough in any naming pattern to suggest one. Maybe I could start with a BUR adressing just one category, but I don't think that would actually help. The only ones I'm confident on changing are already clear. You are right, cowification isn't catchy at all, and I want to avoid anything that leads to tag names like that. A long stranded like transformation_into_cow is about just as bad. It'd be even worse for the role tags. becoming_feminine cannot replace feminization. It just isn't as good.

feminization is both an established word and one of a very small group of possible gender-related tags, neither of which applies to species.

oozeenthusiast said:
It seems like most taggers have that apprehension around species transformation tags. Specific species tags all have really low usage compared to even niche specific transformation tags that aren't directly related to species. I won't deny that it would be a massive undertaking, but I think that the benefit from species transformation tags would be very significant. Transformation is one of the most popular tags on the site, but one of the most important details relevant to any transformation is untagged in most posts.

I mean, exactly the same can be said about hybrid tags, yet we alias those away without mercy. (Obligatory plug for topic #29990.) Sometimes we even get attempts to make species-specific domination tags. I'm not convinced you'll be able to persuade the admins to treat the transformation tags any differently.

Maybe transforming_* for what a character is transforming from and transformed_* for what a character transforms into?

So post #3825755 would be transforming_human, transformed_anthro, transformed_raccoon.

It's better but I don't think it's good enough. I could see them instead being interpreted variants of mid_transformation and after_transformation

oozeenthusiast said:
So post #3825755 would be transforming_human, transformed_anthro, transformed_raccoon.

I wouldn't do individual species, that would be just way too many tags.

If feralization wasn't already taken, I could've suggested something like human_to_anthro being transforming_human and anthroization, and anthro_to_feral could be transforming_anthro and feralization. But feralization is already aliased away to feralized, which is for a non-feral character depicted as a feral (ala alternate_form, not a transformation).

watsit said:
I wouldn't do individual species, that would be just way too many tags.

If feralization wasn't already taken, I could've suggested something like human_to_anthro being transforming_human and anthroization, and anthro_to_feral could be transforming_anthro and feralization. But feralization is already aliased away to feralized, which is for a non-feral character depicted as a feral (ala alternate_form, not a transformation).

I really want species transformation tags because it would be incredibly useful, but I have to admit it's a pipe dream. It would be a massive project. Even if we grouped species together it'd be incredibly difficult, and drawing the groups would be a messy too.

There's a quite a few tags with names that can be interpreted as transformation that are currently reserved for alternate form and alternate species. Here's a snippet from the transformation wiki:

• alternate_form
• anthro
• anthrofied
• feral
• feralized
• taur
• taurification
• alternate_species
• furrification
• humanized
• humanoidized
• mermaidification
• dragonification
• ponification

Bumping this because the issue of transformation tag ambiguity came up again today in topic #42247 (which was a request to alias mask_transformation -> transformative_mask).

I agree with the issue OozeEnthusiast described in the first post, and with the suggestion of a standardised tag name format to clarify what's transforming from, what it's transforming into, and what it's transformed by.

So for example, clothing_transformation is ambiguous, as until you check the wiki or existing posts, it's not clear which of these things it refers to:

• transformation_to_clothing - Character or object transforms into an item of clothing. (I think transformation_into_clothing sounds better, but it's probably better to use "to" for consistency and because it's a bit shorter.)
• Then you get more specific with human_to_clothing, anthro_to_clothing, taur_to_clothing etc.
• transformation_by_clothing - Character puts on a cursed mask, which triggers their transformation.
• transformation_of_clothing - The clothing they are wearing (or is visible nearby) transforms to match their new form: changing to fit their new role/identity, or keeping the same general form and changing to fit their new body shape and size, or merging to become part of their body.

As for the "transformation_through_" naming format in some tags: Personally I think that transformation_through_magic and transformation_through_sex sound better to my ears than "_by_". But I'm willing to sacrifice that for consistency with other tags, which should take priority!

However, despite that need to be consistent, I think the gender TF tags should retain their current abbreviations and format: "mtf_transformation" is much shorter than "transformation_of_male_to_female". :)

(Also, on the subject of naming consistency: I posted in the other thread that IMO the existing tag transformation_by_item (and the similar tag transformation_by_magical_item) should be transformation_by_object, in order to match the use of the word "object" in other tags like holding_object, object in mouth etc.)

wat8548 said:
Ah, the object_vore conundrum. I'm sure there are other groups of tags with similar problems.
[text]

wtf is a object vore? can this be aliased to eating_object..?

dimoretpinel said:
wtf is a object vore? can this be aliased to eating_object..?

object vore apparently implies vore for some reason, not sure if i want vore to be a catch all tag for characters eating stuff that isn't food.

I recently found the tag short_stackification, and I think it's another good example of this TF tagging inconsistency.

To be consistent with tags like taurification, ponification, and some other tags with the "-ification" ending, you'd expect this tag to be used when characters are depicted in the alternate_form of a shortstack. But instead, its wiki page currently says it should be used when a character is transforming into a shortstack.