Posted under Tags
BUR #51259 has been approved by @evazion.
create implication classic_eggman -> dr._eggman
create implication dr._eggman_(riders) -> dr._eggman
create implication dr._robotnik_(adventures_of_sonic_the_hedgehog) -> dr._eggman
Some easy implications for Eggman, IDK how to handle the ones from Sonic Prime lol
uzheng said:
I can see an argument for Classic Eggman and AOSTH Eggman. They're different enough and have history. But Super Eggman and Riders Eggman seems like a stretch. Only one post each. Lacks relevance and prominence for a dedicated tag and an implication, I think.
I mean, we have plenty of other forms with tags that have 1 post that are implied. My bigger concern is how visually distinct a design is and if it's a one-off costume. Riders tags are established (even if some of them irritate me) and the super form is fine, IMO.
Confetto said:
I mean, we have plenty of other forms with tags that have 1 post that are implied. My bigger concern is how visually distinct a design is and if it's a one-off costume. Riders tags are established (even if some of them irritate me) and the super form is fine, IMO.
Yes, but the fact that these tags exist and are implied doesn't mean they can't be reevaluated for usefulness and relevance.
Tags like Sonic the Werehog, Classic Sonic, or Super Sonic are clearly distinct and/or relevant. But a tag like Super Eggman has existed for over a year and still only has a single post, which is pretty telling.
I see in Danbooru a weird tendency to post an obscure, one-off outfit of a character and immediately create a tag for it and then ask for implications. Tags created like this don't really have much purpose.
The bulk update request #51259 (forum #400686) has been approved by @evazion.
The bulk update request #51260 (forum #400687) has been approved by @evazion.
uzheng said:
I see in Danbooru a weird tendency to post an obscure, one-off outfit of a character and immediately create a tag for it and then ask for implications. Tags created like this don't really have much purpose.
Yes, this is getting ridiculous lately. I'm tempted to make a rule that character tags need at least X posts before you can request an implication.
evazion said:
Yes, this is getting ridiculous lately. I'm tempted to make a rule that character tags need at least X posts before you can request an implication.
To be clear none of these tags are mine lol, heck haven’t uploaded any Sonic art at all, just was looking for Adventures Robotnik art and noticed he was implied and there I went lmao.
Relevant thing I've told you before: forum #392869
Just because it exists, doesn't mean it needs to continue to exist or be implicated. You should also do some thinking about if the tags are worth keeping in the first place or not, that way the BUR you write can be to nuke pointless tags instead of trying to carry them through where they will inevitably get automatically retired.
If you don't know how to handle it or you're not familiar enough with the series to make an informed judgement, just make a regular forum topic without a BUR to bring up the existence of the tags and someone else can take over from there.
evazion said:
Yes, this is getting ridiculous lately. I'm tempted to make a rule that character tags need at least X posts before you can request an implication.
Despite my vote on these BURs I wouldn't necessarily be against this. Not all of these tags, even if they exist, need to immediately have an implication if the only purpose the implication currently serves is completionism.
Especially when we start getting into situations where it's not even a series that has established costume/form tags already - the recent Steven Universe case sticks out in my mind.
WRS said:
You should also do some thinking about if the tags are worth keeping in the first place or not, that way the BUR you write can be to nuke pointless tags instead of trying to carry them through where they will inevitably get automatically retired.
Based on the retirement thread, I will add I'm pretty sure that implications only get retired if they have 0 posts. I'm not seeing any retired implications that have posts (even just one).
Updated by Confetto
