Goodra is both of these things and in all the images here, I've not seen so much as a single reason as to not include those two tags.

Can we get an association with this creature?

Daneasaur said:
Goodra is both of these things and in all the images here, I've not seen so much as a single reason as to not include those two tags.

Can we get an association with this creature?

No, it isn't.

Edit: This has been discussed, see:
https://e621.net/forum/show/120855?page=1

His reasoning is just as full of holes as my own.

Nowhere does it say Goodra is made up of just slime, just covered in the stuff all the time (like the mucus of a slug, which are it's previous forms). It does mention time and again that it's a dragon, however.

Daneasaur said:
His reasoning is just as full of holes as my own.

Nowhere does it say Goodra is made up of just slime, just covered in the stuff all the time (like the mucus of a slug, which are it's previous forms). It does mention time and again that it's a dragon, however.

It's not a dragon according to the normal definition of a dragon.
It's a dragon type pokemon, which again I think ought to be a tag.

It definitely doesn't get a slug tag, there's nothing anywhere official that calls it a slug.

Halite said:
It's a dragon type pokemon, which again I think ought to be a tag.

I'm still not convinced that those would be worth the trouble. It'd require massive amount of work to get those tagged (or implicated). Though if someone's up for the task, I'm personally not against it.

Halite said:
It definitely doesn't get a slug tag, there's nothing anywhere official that calls it a slug.

And even if there were, it shouldn't be tagged as one.

Goodra doesn't resemble a dragon in most cases (looks more like a dinosaur if you ask me), and usually isn't drawn like a slug. So it shouldn't be tagged as either. Tag what you see, not what you know. Just because it has some features in common, doesn't make it one.

Also, this has been discussed even before forum #120855, in forum #88725.

If anything, I'd be for getting rid of the current pokemon species implications. Since, for example, mightyena doesn't look much like a hyena in many cases. And it's likely not what users are searching for if they search for hyena.

Genjar said:
I'm still not convinced that those would be worth the trouble. It'd require massive amount of work to get those tagged (or implicated). Though if someone's up for the task, I'm personally not against it.

And even if there were, it shouldn't be tagged as one.

Goodra doesn't resemble a dragon in most cases (looks more like a dinosaur if you ask me), and usually isn't drawn like a slug. So it shouldn't be tagged as either. Tag what you see, not what you know. Just because it has some features in common, doesn't make it one.

Also, this has been discussed even before forum #120855, in forum #88725.

If anything, I'd be for getting rid of the current pokemon species implications. Since, for example, mightyena doesn't look much like a hyena in many cases. And it's likely not what users are searching for if they search for hyena.

The problem I have with your "it's not a dragon' line is Dragonite getting the dragon tag. It looks a lot like Dragonite, yet Dragonite gets the dragon tag and it doesn't? That doesn't really make sense.

Very very very much agreed with you regarding the pokemon species implications, though.

123easy said:
The problem I have with your "it's not a dragon' line is Dragonite getting the dragon tag. It looks a lot like Dragonite, yet Dragonite gets the dragon tag and it doesn't? That doesn't really make sense.

Dragonite has wings, so that makes it seem more dragonlike to me. Western dragon, that is, with six limbs instead of four.

But it's a fair point: there's so many different dragons in mythology and fiction that it's hard to have any guidelines for exactly what should be tagged as one, instead of reptile, lizard or dinosaur. Those tags get used pretty randomly, from what I've seen. Most users have their own ideas of what exactly counts as a dragon.