Topic: Tag implication: intergalactic_macro -> terra_macro

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

So the chain is intergalactic_macro -> terra_macro -> giga -> macro -> regular -> micro -> nano? It seems the tags are a bit lopsided towards "macro"... Is it necessary to distinguish between intergalactic and terra (and instead have something more general like galactic_micro or something)?

TL;DR

Micro has fewer useful subcategories that would also be broadly understood. Intergalactic Macro is broad enough a subcategory to be useful, and specific enough that it covers a particular kind of macro content that is hard to search for otherwise. The name makes the most amount of sense for the broad level of size that it can apply to.

Long Answer

strikerman said:
So the chain is intergalactic_macro -> terra_macro -> giga -> macro -> regular -> micro -> nano? It seems the tags are a bit lopsided towards "macro"...

From what I've seen there's less "official" granularity in micro art circles, and seemingly less need for it. I've seen terms like "half-size" for characters that are, well, half the size of a normal character, or "doll-sized" for characters roughly around the size of the typical Barbie doll, but there's not really a need for either besides splitting hairs, whether a micro character is 30 cm tall, or 3 cm tall doesn't really matter to most, and the interactions or scenes don't really change much in broad strokes (and the former isn't really micro, just size difference, unless we're going to start considering a lot of shortstack characters "micro").

With different macro scales, you can compare the character to whatever objects they're interacting with, how big they are in comparison to things around them, or what the scenery is around them, and know instantly what scale they fit under; with micro, you'll have to break out a ruler to figure out what category a character could fall under, and it wouldn't be particularly useful. The nano is the only real niche in micro that's dramatically different in terms of scenery and interaction.

Is it necessary to distinguish between intergalactic and terra

  • Intergalactic isn't exactly a category unto itself, it's a subgenre of Terra Macro
  • There are over 1200 terra_macro posts, with 109 intergalactic_macro posts, without the tag, a user is limited to searching for terra_macro and tags for celestial bodies, which is problematic, because if you search say - terra_macro galaxy, you will get posts that feature "characters larger than a galaxy" but you'll also get a lot of posts where a planet-sized character has a galaxy in the background as scenery, which is fairly common (currently 43 out of 103 results feature non-intergalactic sized characters), keep in mind, not all intergalactic macro actually depicts a galaxy, nebulae and entire universes or multiverses can be shown.

and instead have something more general like galactic_micro or something

  • Terra covers all macro characters as big as, or larger than a planet. All terra interactions either involve spacecraft, celestial bodies, or other macro sized characters. Terra will always involve a character interacting with "stuff in space"
  • Intergalactic makes the tag broader than galactic, and is more accurate, since characters as big as, or larger than galaxies, are shown in space between or around galaxies
  • It's broad enough to avoid the creation of tags that wouldn't get a lot of posts individually like universal_macro multiversal_macro galactic_macroetc. — terra macro used to be split between planetary_macro and interplanetary_macro
  • All intergalactic macro is terra macro, not all terra macro is intergalactic macro, combining them into a single tag means that a specific niche of content is harder to find, it's not helpful.
  • 1