Alright, as the title states, I feel we should alias bear to ursid/ursine. Yes yes, it's been mentioned on the wikia that for practicality, the bear tag is used as if it were this tag. However, it doesn't fit with the general base species tagging standards we have: at this point, we have euplerids, viverrids, procyonids, giraffids, etc etc. Bear instead of ursine stands out and doesn't really fit the standards being set.

Also, at this point we've aliased the vague term deer to the base cervine tag. This bear tag situation is pretty much the same, why is it somehow ignored when it comes to considering aliasing to terms like this?

With that being said, I'm unsure as to whether it be ursid OR ursine; either way works considering we utilize tags like feline and procyonid, but I'm unsure as to which would be preferred.

Regardless, with this being set, species of ursid/ursine would imply it. Since we're here, may as well list out implication and aliase changes/applications.

Ursid/Ursine implications

• black_bear → ursid/ursine
• brown_bear → ursid/ursine
• grolar_bear → ursid/ursine
• grolar_bear → hybrid
• kermode_bear → ursid/ursine ¹
• panda → ursid/ursine
• pandaren → ursid/ursine
• sloth_bear → ursid/ursine
• spectacled_bear → ursid/ursine
• sun_bear → ursid/ursine
• werebear → ursid/ursine
• werebear → were

• moon_bear/asian_black_bear → black_bear

• grizzly_bear → brown_bear
• kodiak_bear → brown_bear

Ursid/Ursine aliases (mostly alt names)

• american_black_bear → black_bear
• andean_bear → spectacled_bear
• asian_black_bear → moon_bear (or vice/versa)
• honey_bear → honey_bear_(disambiguation) ²
• kodiak_brown_bear → kodiak_bear
• north_american_brown_bear → grizzly_bear
• spirit_bear → kermode_bear

¹ The kermode bear is actually a subspecies of black bear; however, while most do resemble black bears, it often comes in a unique bright and fully white coloration. I figured a black bear implication might not be practical in this case, but I'll leave this one up to mods. If they feel it fits as a black bear, then a black_bear implication rather than ursid/ursine.

² Honey bear is a vague term that can refer to a variety of things: the iconic honey_bear_bottle, the sun_bear, the kinkajou, or even is used in passing as a casual name for a bear who just eats honey. An alias, imho, would be best for this.

-1

I hate feeling like I have to become an amateur zoologist to understand the tags on this site. Nothing wrong with calling bears "bears".

Also..I really don't feel like you did enough to explain your reasoning for this. You say this is the same as aliasing deer to cervine, but I don't know why that was done either. So if you want to convince anyone then don't assume we already know all this stuff.

Dyrone said:
-1

I hate feeling like I have to become an amateur zoologist to understand the tags on this site. Nothing wrong with calling bears "bears".

Also..I really don't feel like you did enough to explain your reasoning for this. You say this is the same as aliasing deer to cervine, but I don't know why that was done either. So if you want to convince anyone then don't assume we already know all this stuff.

Ah apologies, I'm bad at explaining my thoughts and reasoning to others but I'll try:

The most likely reason why deer was aliased away to cervine is because it is an incredibly vague term; there is no base, plain "deer". For one, a "base deer" varies on the user's location and which deer they're used to seeing. The "standard" base deer in the United States is typically the white-tailed_deer (aka the "bambi" style deer), but this deer isn't the "standard" plain deer everywhere. Other cervines are more common and standard in other places, so they wouldn't be seen as the "typical" deer for some.

Similarly, the bear tag is just as vague and dependent on the user's local experiences as to what makes a "standard" bear; the standard bear in the US is usually an american brown bear or grizzly, whereas in eurasia they can have things such as the asiatic black bear (aka moon bear), etc.

Basically, it all boils down to:

*user searches for plain deer* huh? this doesn't look like a (INSERT LOCAL SPECIES OF DEER CONSIDERED COMMON HERE)..., that kind of thing. Same thing with bears

Anyways, that's my reasoning for this proposal + the reasoning for mods aliasing away the base deer tag; the basic, "bambi" base deer some people think of when thinking of plain deer is actually the white-tailed_deer, whereas others may think another species of deer local to them is the "standard" base deer

+1 for a more consistent tagging system

I'd say that "ursine" would fit a bit better with the majority of the other tags, but either is fine

-1

just implicate them to bear, then implicate bear to ursine

+1, a person looking for a bear is looking for an ursine, there's no drawback to this.

kamimatsu said:
-1

just implicate them to bear, then implicate bear to ursine

That's wouldn't make any sense, that'd be like implying dog to dog; ursid IS the term for bear, there is no base bear and the "standard" bear varies wildly depending on where you live. That is why deer was aliased to cervine, cervine IS deer, and there is no base standard deer that is universal to everyone. At most, if this isn't agreed upon, then the alias stays the same as ursid/ursine to bear. The terms are identical; ursid is bear, bear is ursid, and you can have specific species of bear but ursid IS the base bear

Basically, to simplify things: it's an entirely repetitive tag akin to something like dog implies canis, which then implies canine, when canis would be incredibly repetitive and unnecessary tag. Like in this case, it's a repetition of a species tag for which the base species tag would provide the same exact functionality pretty much. That's why deer was aliased to cervine, to cut out the repetitive middleman. Also people looking for plain bear will still get plain bear; the alias to ursine just changes how the tag shows in searches but a search of bear would still bring up all bears just under the name ursid/ursine. It's pretty risk free imho

...and the "standard" bear varies wildly depending on where you live

Fucking Sunbears, they creep me out. Just look at it!

Anyhow, judging that Deer got aliased to Cervine silently, this might follow suit. I personally don't care, though it would make things easier for Pokémon cases.

Siral_Exan said:
Fucking Sunbears, they creep me out. Just look at it!

Anyhow, judging that Deer got aliased to Cervine silently, this might follow suit. I personally don't care, though it would make things easier for Pokémon cases.

Yeah, I was just about to mention that this base species name alias benefits people when it comes to filtering fictional creatures from actual living species, or finding bear-like fictional creatures. That was probably partial reasoning towards deer to cervine as well.

Sun bears are adorably creepy. I love them, they remind me of gangly humans in fake looking bear suits when they stand. It's like they're humans badly imitating bears sometimes

Siral_Exan said:
Anyhow, judging that Deer got aliased to Cervine silently, this might follow suit. I personally don't care, though it would make things easier for Pokémon cases.

I did that because deer and cervine were both tags in use but both had different implications despite getting used the same way and it was a complete mess because of it. I went with aliasing everything to cervine because deer isn't a very descriptive tag, much due to how the cervidae family is divided and common name confusions between different countries. I preferred this way because things like pokemon have creatures which resemble deer but are not deer (such as sawsbuck and stantler). It was either "make everything deer as a base tag that makes no sense" or "make everything's base be the family tag and go from there, resulting in less fuckups".

It would have helped if they weren't made around the same time and used the same ways with gender terms getting aliased to one but species getting implicated to the other. It was incredibly stupid, as are a lot of old, unmaintained tags.

...I went with aliasing everything to cervine because deer isn't a very descriptive tag

So it's pretty much what I figured! And yeah ratte I definitely agree with you on that; deer is so vague and location dependent that honestly I feel it was for the best

When it comes to bears, I pretty much feel the tag kinda fits in the same problem area as the vague deer tag did, imho

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
ursid IS the term for bear, there is no base bear and the "standard" bear varies wildly depending on where you live.

Yeah I don't get the argument that there is no "standard" bear...people are aware there is no standard bear...bear is a term for a group of animals. There is no confusion over this. When I think of bears I think of lots of animals...panda bears, brown bears, polar bears, grizzly bears, etc. I don't think anyone is thinking "well...MY bear that lives in my area IS THE ONLY BEAR." You're manufacturing a problem that doesn't exist.

If ursine means the exact same thing as "bear" then just use the more common term imo...which is "bear".

Dyrone said:
Yeah I don't get the argument that there is no "standard" bear...people are aware there is no standard bear...bear is a term for a group of animals. There is no confusion over this. When I think of bears I think of lots of animals...panda bears, brown bears, polar bears, grizzly bears, etc. I don't think anyone is thinking "well...MY bear that lives in my area IS THE ONLY BEAR." You're manufacturing a problem that doesn't exist.

If ursine means the exact same thing as "bear" then just use the more common term imo...which is "bear".

When somebody says "Bear" to me, I think of a Brown Bear, and so I actually would tag that as just bear and mvoe on. If it auto-aliased to ursine though, I'd realize that I need a more descriptive tag.

You can't say that because you wouldn't be a part of the problem it doesn't exist at all, it does exist.

Furrin_Gok said:
When somebody says "Bear" to me, I think of a Brown Bear, and so I actually would tag that as just bear and mvoe on. If it auto-aliased to ursine though, I'd realize that I need a more descriptive tag.

You can't say that because you wouldn't be a part of the problem it doesn't exist at all, it does exist.

Thank you! That's part of the problem I was trying to alleviate, and you put it to words better than me ahaha.

Siral_Exan said:
Fucking Sunbears, they creep me out. Just look at it]

What could be so bad about a sunb--oh.

Wow.

That looks like what happens if a cobra and a bear had a baby. o_o

regarding bears and deer -- I generally support this.

Especially since with furry art, there's often no real way to SHOW that a bear is one speicies or another.

black bears aren't all black furred. brown bears aren't all brown furred.

I recall looking in grizzly_bear and generally thinking "none of these are grizzly bears. These are all bears." ... with an anthro, a lot of the traits that make a grizzle bear a grizzly bear aren't visible... and grizzly_bear feral ... well.. I think I see one or two that look like grizzlies.

otherwise they are Generic, over the counter, store brand "bears"

(grizzlies, by the way, kinda have a differnet face shape, different claws, and a different back/neck profile )

.... so, over all, some bears might just need to be generic "ursid" anyway.

SnowWolf said:
What could be so bad about a sunb--oh.

Wow.

That looks like what happens if a cobra and a bear had a baby. o_o

regarding bears and deer -- I generally support this.

Especially since with furry art, there's often no real way to SHOW that a bear is one speicies or another.

black bears aren't all black furred. brown bears aren't all brown furred.

I recall looking in grizzly_bear and generally thinking "none of these are grizzly bears. These are all bears." ... with an anthro, a lot of the traits that make a grizzle bear a grizzly bear aren't visible... and grizzly_bear feral ... well.. I think I see one or two that look like grizzlies.

otherwise they are Generic, over the counter, store brand "bears"

(grizzlies, by the way, kinda have a differnet face shape, different claws, and a different back/neck profile )

.... so, over all, some bears might just need to be generic "ursid" anyway.

Fantastic points as usual, snow! And yeah, people tend to overtag grizzly; most of those tagged as such look like generic ursids me.

Honestly, in my personal opinion, grizzly_bear should alias to brown_bear as they all look pretty identical in build and anatomy (grizzlies are are species of brown bear actually). Same with the kodiak bear as well honestly. However, I wasn't sure if other users would agree with that, so I went with a more safe option and suggested them as implications. However, I wouldn't mind them both being aliased to brown bear, but that's me.

MIND YOU most bears tagged as brown/grizzly bear are mistagged, considering they don't match the general anatomy as you stated. The tag needs to be cleaned up as a whole honestly. Species with colors in their names tend to be very mistagged, unfortunately.

DiceLovesBeingBlown said:
Fantastic points as usual, snow! And yeah, people tend to overtag grizzly; most of those tagged as such look like generic ursids me.

<3 <3 <3

Honestly, in my personal opinion, grizzly_bear should alias to brown_bear as they all look pretty identical in build and anatomy (grizzlies are are species of brown bear actually).

HUH! I learned me a thing :D

Looks a lot like red foxes.. lots of subspecies, some are pretty unique, some are "brown bears, but with more bear-i-ness"

I could get behind this, but also not. Some people might get pretty fluffy over it... but htey could probably deal with it

Same with the kodiak bear as well honestly. However, I wasn't sure if other users would agree with that, so I went with a more safe option and suggested them as implications. However, I wouldn't mind them both being aliased to brown bear, but that's me.

It should be the same for both of them, in my opinion.

MIND YOU most bears tagged as brown/grizzly bear are mistagged, considering they don't match the general anatomy as you stated. The tag needs to be cleaned up as a whole honestly. Species with colors in their names tend to be very mistagged, unfortunately.

Yup :c Damn animal-naming-people.

sadly, I don't think there's a better.. name of it. it's jsut.. brown bear.

I think... I think I look at bears when I was on my 'gonna clean up the species' bend past january when I was REALLY sick and bear just kinda broke me.

I wish we could even name it like... American_brown_bear, but that's getting overly specific and there are PLENTY of non-american brown bears. Maybe some shit like Arctos_bear (as they are 'Ursus arctos') but then.. yeah. tha'ts bad.

Bumping this again; even if my bear to ursid alias is denied, there are still a lot of bear species that need the base bear/ursid implications as shown above. Whether or not it's agreed to be aliased to urine, we are in need of base species implications here.

done

Ratte said:
done

Awesome!

Apparently, polar_bear does not imply Ursine. Could a staff member fix that, and see if there are any other missing implications?

Siral_Exan said:
Apparently, polar_bear does not imply Ursine. Could a staff member fix that, and see if there are any other missing implications?

Oh that is most definitely a mistake, possibly an overlooked implication. Will be fixed soon hopefully! @Ratte

I can't think of any other missing ursine implications, but polar bear is definitely one that needs the implication.

gotcha fam

Ratte said:
gotcha fam

Noice! Thanks ratte!

@Siral_Exan There ya go

Shouldn't bear_humanoid be aliased to ursine_humanoid?

Opilione said:
Shouldn't bear_humanoid be aliased to ursine_humanoid?

That'd probably be the best honestly, since the base species terms are aliased to one another

I wanted some input before doing that, otherwise sure.

Sorry to bring up more, but ursine_humanoid should also imply ursine, right? bear_humanoid still does, but I dunno how that'll work when it's aliased.

Opilione said:
Sorry to bring up more, but ursine_humanoid should also imply ursine, right? bear_humanoid still does, but I dunno how that'll work when it's aliased.

having cleaned through all of the animal humanoid tags it's likely there will be some fuckups here and there, the whole project took 6-8 hours and my brain was mud by the time i was done

if you don't want to bump threads about it you can dmail me directly and i'll get around to it when i have time