What the actual fuck is this all about?
sonic_rainboom

And can we please get rid of it?

From looking at posts, it's just rainbow dash doing a sonic boom but with rainbows

TheHuskyK9 said:
From looking at posts, it's just rainbow dash doing a sonic boom but with rainbows

This makes the scientist in me want to punch a pony.

Edit:
Actually, I'm now wondering if (theoretically) you managed to break the light speed barrier and cause the light equivalent of a sonic boom if it would refract and create a rainbow.
I'm not a theoretical physicist, but I'd bet on white light, not rainbow.

Halite said:
This makes the scientist in me want to punch a pony.

Edit:
Actually, I'm now wondering if (theoretically) you managed to break the light speed barrier and cause the light equivalent of a sonic boom if it would refract and create a rainbow.
I'm not a theoretical physicist, but I'd bet on white light, not rainbow.

The answer is magical prisms.

As for the tag. It's just a feature specific to the show. It was originally the focus of a single episode back in season 1, but it's happened in a few more episodes since then. Its recurring but not really a major element to the show. It is more relevant to than fans than anything, and thus it probably makes more sense to have it on derpibooru than here, but it's easy enough to verify with tagging since...well it's all visual so at least we don't have to worry about that.

Whether to keep it or not...eh I could take it or leave it.

TheHuskyK9 said:
From looking at posts, it's just rainbow dash doing a sonic boom but with rainbows

This is pretty much literally what it is.

TheHuskyK9 said:
From looking at posts, it's just rainbow dash doing a sonic boom but with rainbows

That's pretty much exactly what it is. It's canon to My Little Pony. Sonic Rainboom - MLP Wiki

Why would you want to get rid of this tag? It's a thing and it's not even ambiguous.

We don't get rid of tags on the basis of a personal pet peeve. It's distinct, it is identifiable, it has a clear definition, it is not the same as any other tag, it is not causing any problems with any other tags, and some people find it valuable.

Therefore, suggestion to invalidate it is denied.

However, it is in sore need of a good wiki.

Lance_Armstrong said:
Why would you want to get rid of this tag? It's a thing and it's not even ambiguous.

Because on the surface it just looks like a rainbow.

It's almost memetic, but there really isn't much like it that it could be tagged with instead. The closest might be rainbow_dash rainbow flying, but that leaves out other characters doing it (if there are any) and would probably not work very well in practice since...well their's a rainbow on her butt and she's got wings.

furrypickle said:
We don't get rid of tags on the basis of a personal pet peeve. It's distinct, it is identifiable, it has a clear definition, it is not the same as any other tag, it is not causing any problems with any other tags, and some people find it valuable.

Therefore, suggestion to invalidate it is denied.

However, it is in sore need of a good wiki.

Do you think it should imply friendship_is_magic/my_little_pony? After all it is specific to the show.

Though, it would probably be already implicated because of one of the characters in most cases, so it may not be worth the effort.

parasprite said:
Do you think it should imply friendship_is_magic/my_little_pony? After all it is specific to the show.

Though, it would probably be already implicated because of one of the characters in most cases, so it may not be worth the effort.

I think not on this one. Because it's about the phenomenon and is bordering on becoming a meme, and is not restricted to mlp canon. If it's an mlp character, then those tags will be added for the character anyways. But if it's a parody or something inspired to do something similar then the tag is still focused on the visual phenomenon and not limited to exclusively to the term's point of origin. If that makes sense. Btw, thanks for pulling together a wiki for it.

furrypickle said:
I think not on this one. Because it's about the phenomenon and is bordering on becoming a meme, and is not restricted to mlp canon. If it's an mlp character, then those tags will be added for the character anyways. But if it's a parody or something inspired to do something similar then the tag is still focused on the visual phenomenon and not limited to exclusively to the term's point of origin. If that makes sense. Btw, thanks for pulling together a wiki for it.

That's what I thought too, I figured it was worth mentioning since it might be brought up in the future.

It was actually Lance that did most of the wiki though, I pretty much just added links and thumbnails to it.

Lance_Armstrong said:

parasprite said:
That's what I thought too, I figured it was worth mentioning since it might be brought up in the future.

It was actually Lance that did most of the wiki though, I pretty much just added links and thumbnails to it.

That will teach me to assume. So thanks to both of you [Lance Armstrong and Parasprite] for collaborating on the wiki then. Checking the history it looks like you both added good points to it. So thanks, and it looks good. =)

Lance_Armstrong said:
...It's a thing ...

Nope.
It's something someone made up, that doesn't make it a thing.

I can live with it being a tag, but please don't act like it's real.

Halite said:
Nope.
It's something someone made up, that doesn't make it a thing.

I can live with it being a tag, but please don't act like it's real.

Who said it was? Can something not be described as a "Thing" without being real now?

Durandal said:
Who said it was? Can something not be described as a "Thing" without being real now?

Not really, because if it isn't real then it isn't a thing.
I know there's a lot of people who like to blur that line between fantasy and reality, but wanting something to be a thing doesn't make it a thing.
You can't just make shit up and declare it to be a thing.

Halite said:
Not really, because if it isn't real then it isn't a thing.
I know there's a lot of people who like to blur that line between fantasy and reality, but wanting something to be a thing doesn't make it a thing.
You can't just make shit up and declare it to be a thing.

Okay, just about the last argument I thought I'd get into was what determines whether or not something is a thing.

So I'm guessing you wouldn't enjoy the movie The Thing or the book The Things they Carried.

Seriously though, that's like saying an X-wing isn't a spacecraft because it's fictional. It's still a thing, albeit a fictional one. Could one not accurately refer to it as a thing while discussing the story?

Durandal said:
Okay, just about the last argument I thought I'd get into was what determines whether or not something is a thing.

So I'm guessing you wouldn't enjoy the movie The Thing or the book The Things they Carried.

Seriously though, that's like saying an X-wing isn't a spacecraft because it's fictional. It's still a thing, albeit a fictional one. Could one not accurately refer to it as a thing while discussing the story?

In a fictional context, sure.
Last I checked we're all real people though.

Halite said:
In a fictional context, sure.
Last I checked we're all real people though.

Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?

Durandal said:
Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?

It's real life.

Halite said:
It's real life.

Well, if that helps you sleep at night, man.