The tag alias #66186 fakemon -> fanmade_species has been rejected.

Reason: To group up fake pokemon, digimon, pals and more.

EDIT: The tag alias fakemon -> fanmade_species (forum #389840) has been rejected by @slyroon.

dimoretpinel said:
Reason: To group up fake pokemon, digimon, pals and more.

Fakemon aren't always pokemon, digimon, pals, etc. It's a misnomer to call them all "fanmade".

watsit said:
Fakemon aren't always pokemon, digimon, pals, etc. It's a misnomer to call them all "fanmade".

I'd argue that it's not a fakemon if it's just an original creature design with no intention of fitting into some pre-established franchise? I mean, the wiki for that tag seems to directly contradict you in the first sentence.

dsco said:
I'd argue that it's not a fakemon if it's just an original creature design with no intention of fitting into some pre-established franchise? I mean, the wiki for that tag seems to directly contradict you in the first sentence.

They can be inspired by or be intended to evoke a connection to, but that doesn't make them fan-made or inherently part of the franchise.

Yeah the wording of fanmade_species seems like it would also include furry original species like dutch angel dragons, protogens, etc.

I know fakemon is currently for both pokemon and digimon, but it seems to me like it would make the most sense if pokemon, digimon, and palworld each had their own fake- tags. Fakemon for pokemon as it's a very widely used and recognized word in the community, fakepal for palworld, and then for digimon I'm not sure as I'm not a digimon fan. Does the digimon community really use fakemon too or is that just an e6 thing?

cloudpie said:
I know fakemon is currently for both pokemon and digimon, but it seems to me like it would make the most sense if pokemon, digimon, and palworld each had their own fake- tags.

The problem is it can be ambiguous what franchise a particular fakemon is connected to. Especially given the similarity between pals and pokemon, how could you distinguish a fakepal from a fakepokemon, if there weren't elements from palworld or pokemon visible? At which point, you'd have fakemon+pokemon for fakepokemon and fakemon+palworld for fakepal, letting fakemon standalone for more ambiguous cases that can't be tagged either way.

watsit said:
At which point, you'd have fakemon+pokemon for fakepokemon and fakemon+palworld for fakepal, letting fakemon standalone for more ambiguous cases that can't be tagged either way.

...Wait, you could be onto something here though-
I know we're currently not supposed to tag the franchise on fakemon but... maybe that should be changed?
I'm guessing it's currently this way so that we can search fakemon pokemon for images containing both?

cloudpie said:
...Wait, you could be onto something here though-
I know we're currently not supposed to tag the franchise on fakemon but... maybe that should be changed?
I'm guessing it's currently this way so that we can search fakemon pokemon for images containing both?

Wouldn't fakemon pokemon_(species) still work for that? Provided you don't have it imply pokemon_(species)

The tag alias fakemon -> fanmade_species (forum #389840) has been rejected by @slyroon.

dsco said:
Wouldn't fakemon pokemon_(species) still work for that? Provided you don't have it imply pokemon_(species)

Oh yes that's true!