Topic: Frowning critter bulk implications

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

smokelord

Member

The bulk update request #9493 is pending approval.

create implication catfiene_(poppy_playtime) (0) -> poppy_playtime (2732)
create implication catfiene_(poppy_playtime) (0) -> frowning_critters (26)
create implication dogpressed_(poppy_playtime) (21) -> poppy_playtime (2732)
create implication dogpressed_(poppy_playtime) (21) -> frowning_critters (26)
create implication floppy_flopzee_(eggritos) (6) -> poppy_playtime (2732)
create implication floppy_flopzee_(eggritos) (6) -> frowning_critters (26)
create implication groddy_grudgebear_(eggritos) (9) -> poppy_playtime (2732)
create implication groddy_grudgebear_(eggritos) (9) -> frowning_critters (26)
create implication icky_piggy_(eggritos) (7) -> poppy_playtime (2732)
create implication icky_piggy_(eggritos) (7) -> frowning_critters (26)

Reason: Corresponding tags for several frowning critters of the the smiling critters au

Watsit

Privileged

smokelord said:
Reason: Corresponding tags for several frowning critters of the the smiling critters au

They shouldn't imply fan_character since characters can be depicted in ways that don't involve anything from the setting they're a fan character of. Similarly they shouldn't imply the setting they're a fan character of for the same reason, they can be drawn without anything from the setting in question visible. They should only imply what they inextricably belong to.

smokelord

Member

watsit said:
They shouldn't imply fan_character since characters can be depicted in ways that don't involve anything from the setting they're a fan character of. Similarly they shouldn't imply the setting they're a fan character of for the same reason, they can be drawn without anything from the setting in question visible. They should only imply what they inextricably belong to.

So not to brand them as fan characters, because the characters could be original in certain cases?

Could you simply, what you mean, for me please.

-Freshly baked and apple scented

Smokelord

Watsit

Privileged

smokelord said:
So not to brand them as fan characters, because the characters could be original in certain cases?

Could you simply, what you mean, for me please.

-Freshly baked and apple scented

Smokelord

For example, Kindle Fae as a ninetales would be a fan character, since it's a character designed to be in someone else's preexisting work. That's what they were originally created for and what all of their original art depicted. But later on, they started getting drawn as a normal fox outside of any pokemon setting, where they wouldn't be a fan character. Because they're not an official character, there's nothing stopping any character from being separated from another's preexisting work that they were originally conceived as a fan character for.

Updated

smokelord

Member

watsit said:
For example, Kindle Fae as a ninetales would be a fan character, since it's a character designed to be in someone else's preexisting work. That's what they were originally created for and what all of their original art depicted. But later on, they started getting drawn as a normal fox outside of any pokemon setting, where they wouldn't be a fan character. Because they're not an official character, there's nothing stopping any character from being separated from another's preexisting work that they were originally conceived as a fan character for.

Ah I see your perspective now.

Thank you for clearing that up for me.

- Freshly Roasted and packaged

Smokelord

smokelord

Member

So now...

Can bulk implications be edited?

I have been having some issues with the feature.

- Freshly grown

Smokelord

  • 1