The bulk update request #9891 is pending approval.

Reason: topic #39804
topic #39296
topic #45905
topic #31246 ~ alternates forms and species are lore discussion (?)

unification of form and species alt tags under the -fied sufix as well as alt form and species implications/aliases.

PS: following in line with the Bimbo tag, other bimbo tags should be invalidated as well.
PPS: Rather confused why this is saying an existing implication is missing.

The bulk update request #9892 is pending approval.

create implication humanoidified (0) -> humanoid (456216)
create implication humanoidified (0) -> alternate_form (4381)
create alias dragonfication (1) -> alternate_species (36800)
create alias anthrofication (1) -> anthrofied (151284)
create alias equification (1) -> alternate_species (36800)
create alias robotification (12) -> robotified (0)
create implication robotified (0) -> alternate_species (36800)
create implication robotified (0) -> robot (73135)
create alias spherification (34) -> spherified (0)
create implication spherified (0) -> alternate_form (4381)
create alias boxification (54) -> boxified (0)
create implication boxified (0) -> alternate_form (4381)
create alias toonification (120) -> toonified (0)
create implication toonified (0) -> alternate_form (4381)
remove implication mermaidification (236) -> merfolk (6479)
remove alias rule_85 (0) -> ponification (1788)
remove implication ponification (1788) -> my_little_pony (322806)
remove implication furrification (8154) -> alternate_species (36800)

Reason: manual follow up

imply furrification -> furrified
imply rule_85 -> my_little_pony
alias mermaidification -> draconcopodified
alias dragonified -> alternate_species
alias humanoidized -> humanoidified
alias humanized -> humanfied
alias feralized -> feralfied
alias dragonification -> alternate_species
alias ponification -> alternate_species

ryu_deacon said:
create implication monsterfied (2) -> alternate_form (4369)

I'd rather alias that away, given how "monster" is applied and used to describe anything from eldritch horrors to monster hunter creatures to cute pokemon, digimon, etc. But even taking it to mean abominable or "monstrous", I'm not sure alternate_form would always apply since it could just mean a character got angry and more muscular with a bad hair/fur day, but is still anthro or feral or whatever they already were.

ryu_deacon said:
create alias geniefied (26) -> alternate_species (36655)

Is "genie" really a separate species? Examples like post #5173023 is still a tiger, just forming out of a lamp, and stuff like post #5185864 is visibly no different from any other pointy-eared humanoid, they're just called a genie in their source media.

I'm on some of the same things that Watsit's brought up, several of the things to be implied to alt-form seem kinda dubious. not to mention that a lot of these tag names seem like tf, and not alternate_*.

also, I don't think that bimbofication should be included in this, it's a much different case than the rest of these and it shouldn't be slipped into BUR like this.

watsit said:
[...]Is "genie" really a separate species? Examples like post #5173023 is still a tiger, just forming out of a lamp[...]

That question could be made for the greater majority of all supernatural/ mythological species >>.. werewolves, ghosts, cerberus , and demons being some of the most common 'problem' groups. As for Shantae that is more of a general humanoid problem, she as a genie/djinn is not really the only species existing that is indistinguishable from stereotypical elves in many cases.

whether something is a valid taggeble species is kinda a topic for another thread, particularly widely known ones like these.

BURs edited, some connections were actually incorrect.

I disagree that there is any difference between Bimbo and the reason it was invalidated and bimbofication but still decided to take it off the list.

As for the other implications I do not feel they imply transformation, alot of the posts under those tags do not even feature transformation but do feature characters in a alternate form or species of themselves. Some submissions are also mistags of characters in bondage gear or contraptions for example..

I like the idea of the BUR, but it still needs work. There are things that don't make sense, like why are you un-aliasing rule_85 but just implying it in the follow up?

scth said:
I like the idea of the BUR, but it still needs work. There are things that don't make sense, like why are you un-aliasing rule_85 but just implying it in the follow up?

Because the tag chain rule_85 > ponification > my_little_pony is incorrect. Rule 85 is exclusively concerned with the fictional Equestria species from the my_little_pony franchise, ponification on the other hand can include any pony species or breed whether real or fictional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony

I again do not see were this idea that any of these tags actually prescribe a transformation comes from, only 3 of these tags have wiki's that actually specify a transformation while not a single tag uses examples that actually feature a transformation and the majority of posts under these tags seems to suggest that the userbase actually applying these tags does not share the opinion that these tags exclusively describe a transformation.

alternate form and alternate species also do not explicitly exclude transformation so that argument is kinda moot.
As long as the start and end form or species are in line with the core idea of these tags I dont think it should matter if a transformation process happens to be depicted between these forms or species.

ryu_deacon said:
alternate form and alternate species also do not explicitly exclude transformation so that argument is kinda moot.

They do, or are supposed to. A post shouldn't be tagged both species_transformation and alternate_species for the same character being a different species, just as a character shouldn't be tagged with both crossgender (aka "alternate gender") and gender_transformation. It's one or the other, depending on their being in-image indication of the change (*_transformation) or not (alternate_*).

But my issue doesn't have to do with transformations. "Monster" is too ill-defined, so a character that is "monsterified" doesn't necessarily mean they're depicted in an alternate_form, so that would cause mistags at least some of the time. As well, genie isn't a species in the sense of a wolf or fox being a species, characters can be (and it seems often are) "geniefied" but still be their original species, so alternate_species wouldn't apply most of the time (and it seems at least some times, the tag is used for a character getting sucked into a "genie"/oil lamp or jar or something, with no indication they became a genie rather than are simply trapped).

watsit said:
They do, or are supposed to. A post shouldn't be tagged both species_transformation and alternate_species for the same character being a different species, just as a character shouldn't be tagged with both crossgender (aka "alternate gender") and gender_transformation. It's one or the other, depending on their being in-image indication of the change (*_transformation) or not (alternate_*).

again were is that specified, it just seems like feelings and not backed by anything of substance.

But my issue doesn't have to do with transformations. "Monster" is too ill-defined, so a character that is "monsterified" doesn't necessarily mean they're depicted in an alternate_form, so that would cause mistags at least some of the time. As well, genie isn't a species in the sense of a wolf or fox being a species, characters can be (and it seems often are) "geniefied" but still be their original species, so alternate_species wouldn't apply most of the time (and it seems at least some times, the tag is used for a character getting sucked into a "genie"/oil lamp or jar or something, with no indication they became a genie rather than are simply trapped).

Are in support of invalidating monster along with werewolf, cerberus, hydra, ghost, dwarf, naga, lamia, angel, alien, vampire and others?

ryu_deacon said:
again were is that specified, it just seems like feelings and not backed by anything of substance.

gender_transformation wiki says:

Not to be confused with:

• crossgender - when a character is drawn as different gender from their usual, but there is no transformation shown.

Given that crossgender is just a unique term that means alternate_gender (it's even aliased), the same should apply to species_transformation and alternate_species. If there's no visible indication of a transformation, it can't be tagged as transformation, and the alternate_* tags should only be used when there's no transformation indicated.

ryu_deacon said:
Are in support of invalidating monster along with werewolf, cerberus, hydra, ghost, dwarf, naga, lamia, angel, alien, vampire and others?

monster, angel, alien, demon, yes, I'd like them all to be invalidated since they have no defining characteristics and can be plastered on whatever anyone says it applies to (at best there would be tags like angelic or demonic or monstrous, which are adjectives to describe the appearance of a character, rather than a noun that labels them something irrespective of appearance). I can see and sympathize with wanting to invalidate werewolf, given how often it's used for plain anthro wolves with no transformation aspect visible and nothing distinguish them from regular anthro wolves (or sometimes even feral wolves, as there are werewolf myths that have the wolf form be feral instead of anthro).