Topic: New tag suggestion: Pilosan OR Xenarthran

Posted under Tag/Wiki Projects and Questions

Pilosans are a group of animals that consist of sloths and anteaters, whereas Xenarthrans contain sloths, anteaters, and armadillo.

Pilosans, aka animals from the order Pilosa, have so many overlapping qualities and features (quadrupedal, very hairy, long claws, etc) that having it as a base tag that implies mammal would be convenient and helpful imho.

I also included Xenarthrans, animals from the superorder Xenarthra, as a possible option instead, which includes the armadillo. These three species are all similar in many ways, so an implication could work there, but some may find that to be a bit too broad perhaps, tho imho they're all similar animals. It also may be harder to type in general (especially when applying the vague base tag to fictional creatures), so I provided both options. Either works for me; just that, if it's the latter, then armadillo will have implications. With this in mind, here are planned implications for either of the tags:

Related implications (general)

Related implications (if pilosan)

Related implications (if xenarthran)

Updated

Bumping this; I personally think, at minimum, pilosan is pretty helpful. However, xenarthran could also be a just as helpful alternative, serving the same purpose but also including the armadillos, unlike pilosan.

Whichever seems the most helpful in terms of categorization would probably be the best, imho. Hell, some might find an argument for both tags to be in use (pilosans are a group of mamals within the xenarthra superorder, after all)

BUT I am unsure as to which is preferred and which would be better in terms of categorization, searching, and excluding.

Updated by anonymous

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Bumping this; I personally think, at minimum, pilosan is pretty helpful. However, xenarthran could also be a just as helpful alternative, serving the same purpose but also including the armadillos, unlike pilosan.

Whichever seems the most helpful in terms of categorization would probably be the best, imho. Hell, some might find an argument for both tags to be in use (pilosans are a group of mamals within the xenarthra superorder, after all)

BUT I am unsure as to which is preferred and which would be better in terms of categorization, searching, and excluding.

Definitely pilosans.

Updated by anonymous

Ratte

Former Staff

I don't see what would be wrong with having both if it's correct. The worst that'll really happen is that some species will just have both pilosan and xenarthran tags applied and similar things happen to tons of species here anyway.

I've queued up a few implications and I'll wait a little bit to see what people say before I actually approve anything.

Updated by anonymous

Ratte said:
I don't see what would be wrong with having both if it's correct. The worst that'll really happen is that some species will just have both pilosan and xenarthran tags applied and similar things happen to tons of species here anyway.

I've queued up a few implications and I'll wait a little bit to see what people say before I actually approve anything.

Gotcha! I just thought that some may consider it to be too broad of species tag, hence my hesitation even though it's technically correct.

I'm fine personally with having both myself.

Updated by anonymous

Ratte

Former Staff

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Gotcha! I just thought that some may consider it to be too broad of species tag, hence my hesitation even though it's technically correct.

I'm fine personally with having both myself.

Sure, I've approved them both. Hopefully there are no issues.

Updated by anonymous

Ratte said:
Sure, I've approved them both. Hopefully there are no issues.

Awesome! Thanks Ratte!

If there are any issues, since the species is underrated, at least cleaning up pilosan from the armadillo tags will be pretty simple.

Updated by anonymous

  • 1