I would assume it's for furred characters that have reptile features, but there are a lot of furred dragons that don't appear reptilian in any way

Aren't dragons automatically considered reptilians since they have scales?

I don't know the requirements for something to be considered reptilian

waydence said:
I would assume it's for furred characters that have reptile features, but there are a lot of furred dragons that don't appear reptilian in any way

Looks like another case of WHO IS TAGGING THESE?, see also feathered_reptilian.

Related: topic #37275, topic #37159, topic #37340

The bulk update request #4248 has been rejected.

nuke tag furred_reptilian (0)
nuke tag feathered_reptilian (0)

Reason: Let's put this to a vote.

EDIT: The bulk update request #4248 (forum #358634) has been rejected by @scaliespe.

bitwolfy said:
The bulk update request #4248 has been rejected.

nuke tag furred_reptilian (0)
nuke tag feathered_reptilian (0)

Reason: Let's put this to a vote.

Just want to mention that they also created a bunch of other useless tags, albeit not as prominent. Some tags also existed before they came around.

See feathered_wyvern, furred_wyvern, etc.

Well, tags like furred_snake and feathered_dinosaur exist (though the latter is scientifically accurate), so something like furred_reptile seems like it might be valid. I don’t know why it’s “reptilian” rather than “reptile,” though. If it’s meant to include things that are scalie but which don’t fall under reptile taxonomically, ie. furred_dragon/furred_kobold, then I think furred_scalie would’ve been a more consistent tag name.

The existence of tags like furred_snake and feathered_dinosaur (which both imply reptile, and therefore scalie) means we’re already in the position where scalies don’t necessarily have scales. Being able to search for or blacklist these exceptions seems like it might be useful. So I think I’d be in favor of keeping these tags, but they could probably do with a name change.

waydence said:
I would assume it's for furred characters that have reptile features, but there are a lot of furred dragons that don't appear reptilian in any way

Dragons are always reptilian in classical mythology. The “furred dragon” is a modern invention. So, I would argue that even a furred dragon must have reptilian features to be considered a dragon at all. I’ve noticed an unfortunate trend of using “dragon” as a garbage bin for any otherwise unidentifiable tetrapod-like species, which is definitely not what dragons are. It dilutes the meaning of “dragon” to the point that it’s nearly useless. This situation is worsened by the fact that dragon-type Pokémon often get tagged dragon as well, even if they in no way resemble any kind of dragon, like latias. I’d rather people make more use of unknown_species or similar tags instead of polluting dragon with things that don’t even resemble dragons. See also: mammalian_dragon, which seems to me like some kind of oxymoron and probably deserves to be nuked.

Example: this is absolutely not a dragon. It’s more like a cat/fox hybrid with horns, or something like that. Nothing like this should ever be tagged as “dragon.” (It’s also clearly not male… badly tagged post all around) But I digress. (Edit: I fixed that post)

scaliespe said:
Dragons are always reptilian in classical mythology. The “furred dragon” is a modern invention. So, I would argue that even a furred dragon must have reptilian features to be considered a dragon at all. I’ve noticed an unfortunate trend of using “dragon” as a garbage bin for any otherwise unidentifiable tetrapod-like species, which is definitely not what dragons are. It dilutes the meaning of “dragon” to the point that it’s nearly useless.

Those filthy modern degenerates, coming to our land, diluting our pure dragon blood...
The problem is that classical dragons are just as invented as modern ones. They come from variety of cultures in variety of shapes, so even before furries they were quite a broad category for "unidentifiable species".
Also, reptiles exist, you can reference a real reptile to determine if given character should count as one.
Can't do the same for dragons. Like with other fictional species tags (kobolds, worgen, goblins), depending on art style, sometimes your only real option is for author to say that it's a dragon. Or have enough people agree that it's a dragon.

I bet you'll have a heart attack if you look at something like sash_lilac.

scaliespe said:
I think furred_scalie would’ve been a more consistent tag name.

While that might be more consistent (furred snake -> scalie did set the precedent), the tag name would be quite the oxymoron.

bitwolfy said:
The bulk update request #4248 has been rejected.

nuke tag furred_reptilian (0)
nuke tag feathered_reptilian (0)

Reason: Let's put this to a vote.

Well that's a live nuke lying around. Any good tags we can alias them to as an alternative to nuking, or are we nuking em

snpthecat said:

While that might be more consistent (furred snake -> scalie did set the precedent), the tag name would be quite the oxymoron.

I was talking with slyroon about this a while ago, and he said he’d prefer to keep it to furred_scalie rather than furred_reptilian for the sake of consistency. It is a bit oxymoronic though, yes. I’ve even suggested changing scalie itself to reptilian to help people avoid falling into the "scalie = has scales" trap, but that idea never got much traction.

snpthecat said:

Well that's a live nuke lying around. Any good tags we can alias them to as an alternative to nuking, or are we nuking em

As I said a year ago, I’d rather keep these around and I don’t really understand all the upvotes on the nuke. There are plenty of cases of scalie species being drawn with fur, either alongside or instead of scales. Why wouldn’t we have a tag for that? It’s clearly common enough to warrant one.

The bulk update request #7381 is active.

create alias furred_reptilian (0) -> furred_scalie (33506)
create alias feathered_reptilian (0) -> feathered_scalie (8973)
create alias reptilians (2) -> scalie (644103)
change category furred_scalie (33506) -> species
change category feathered_scalie (8973) -> species
create implication furred_scalie (33506) -> scalie (644103)
create implication feathered_scalie (8973) -> scalie (644103)

Reason: Alternative vote: Alias them to their scalie counterparts like the reptilian -> scalie alias (unless we want to flip aliasing scalie to reptillian).

scaliespe said:
[...] I don’t really understand all the upvotes on the nuke.

We're nuke-happy

EDIT: The bulk update request #7381 (forum #398999) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #7382 is active.

create implication furred_snake (231) -> furred_scalie (33506)
create implication furred_dragon (32204) -> furred_scalie (33506)
create implication furred_kobold (828) -> furred_scalie (33506)
create implication furred_scalie (33506) -> fur (1748669)
create implication feathered_dinosaur (3391) -> feathered_scalie (8973)
create implication feathered_dragon (4980) -> feathered_scalie (8973)
create implication feathered_snake (596) -> feathered_scalie (8973)
create implication feathered_scalie (8973) -> feathers (221611)

Reason: While we're at it, may as well throw a few more on the pile.

EDIT: The bulk update request #7382 (forum #399000) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #7381 (forum #398999) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #7382 (forum #399000) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #4248 (forum #358634) has been rejected by @scaliespe.