The bulk update request #7197 is pending approval.

remove implication selfcest (4582) -> square_crossover (7418)
remove implication past_meets_present (193) -> square_crossover (7418)
remove alias clonecest (0) -> selfcest (4582)

Reason: Very often, square_crossover requires external knowledge to tag, as different forms of the same character can look quite dissimilar. Though sometimes they may look the same, they don't always, similar to how the family tags were moved to lore.

post #2401534 post #2730967 post #2575174 post #919439

^ Without lore knowledge, would you assume these were the same character?

Part 2:

alias square_crossover -> square_crossover_(lore)
alias selfcest -> selfcest_(lore)
alias clonecest -> selfcest_(lore)
imply selfcest_(lore) -> square_crossover_(lore)

I'm currently not sure what to do with past_meets_present... Suggestions very appreciated.

Can I ask why the mehs? (Also bumping above the wall of approvals)

Because the characters are tagged already, and it would be innate knowledge that it's two versions of the same character (e.g. if you know who link and link_(wolf_form) are to tag them, you'd also recognize they're different forms of the same character). Unlike something like familial relations, which are more arbitrary and background-knowledge-based, two identified characters being different versions of the same character is a bit more apparent by comparison, IMO. But I can see the position that it's not some visually objective element like "fur" or "tail".

watsit said:
Because the characters are tagged already, and it would be innate knowledge that it's two versions of the same character (e.g. if you know who link and link_(wolf_form) are to tag them, you'd also recognize they're different forms of the same character). Unlike something like familial relations, which are more arbitrary and background-knowledge-based, two identified characters being different versions of the same character is a bit more apparent by comparison, IMO. But I can see the position that it's not some visually objective element like "fur" or "tail".

I feel like the key thing here is that character tags generally operate mostly on TWYK, while general tags are supposed to be entirely based on TWYS. You could also, say, make the argument that if you know who princess_luna_(mlp) and princess_celestia_(mlp) are to tag them, you know that they're sisters, but that doesn't make sisters_(lore) not a lore tag.

From the image alone, I would have no idea that asriel_dreemurr and flowey_the_flower are the same character, for example.

nimphia said:

Part 2:
I'm currently not sure what to do with past_meets_present... Suggestions very appreciated.

I don't feel that the tag is fully twys, and so wouldn't really fit in the general category. The closest place to put it would be in lore.

However the lore category currently is viewed as a category where tags within it can be added or removed by the artist with impunity (with exception of adult_(lore) and young_(lore)), and that's probably what's contributing to the meh votes. Moving crossgender, alternate_species or the tags of this BUR would be slightly broadening what it's for