The bulk update request #1421 is pending approval.

change category coloring_request (0) -> meta
change category gif_conversion_request (0) -> meta
create alias tag_request (0) -> tagme (2172)
change category language_request (0) -> meta
change category song_request (0) -> meta
change category edit_request (3) -> meta
change category art_request (0) -> invalid
change category requested (0) -> invalid
change category requested_art (0) -> invalid

Reason: Adding some of the various "request" tags to the meta and fixing duplicate/unneeded tags

Did not realize there was a colorization request tag until now, will definitely have to tag some posts with it :eyes:

ifuknowmenoudont said:
category commentary_request -> meta

That seems like it's just asking for a creepy or troll comment.

ifuknowmenoudont said:
create alias language_request -> translation_request

This doesn't seem right. That seems like someone who doesn't know what the language is, more than someone asking for a translation of it.

watsit said:
This doesn't seem right. That seems like someone who doesn't know what the language is, more than someone asking for a translation of it.

Yeah, I thought that was odd too. They should both be separate tags but still meta-fy the one that isn't in the meta tag set

You're both right, I fixed that part of the BUR

watsit said:
That seems like it's just asking for a creepy or troll comment.

Elaborate.

I think with commentary you mean description. Over at danbooru they call it artist commentary but I have never heard of it referred like this here.

earlopain said:
I think with commentary you mean description. Over at danbooru they call it artist commentary but I have never heard of it referred like this here.

Would description_request work better? I wonder if commentary_request is brought over from that booru you mentioned

Looking at the wiki they have over there it seems to be more like a translation_request for descriptions. If that is what this bur is for I think putting translation somewhere in the name should be done. Otherwise I would just think about having to put the description somewhere, no translation needed.

earlopain said:
Looking at the wiki they have over there it seems to be more like a translation_request for descriptions. If that is what this bur is for I think putting translation somewhere in the name should be done. Otherwise I would just think about having to put the description somewhere, no translation needed.

There's no wiki page for either, I'll just remove it from the BUR

ifuknowmenoudont said:
Elaborate.

Without clarification, it sounds like it's asking for users to provide their own commentary on the image, which given the nature of most images here, would tend toward the creepy or troll-y end of the spectrum that would get people in trouble.

ifuknowmenoudont said:
create alias art_request -> requested_art
create alias requested -> requested_art
category requested_art -> meta

I'm not sure what these are intended for, but I think aliasing to art_request would be better. Requested art sounds like an image that was requested, i.e. the result of a request, instead of actively requesting something.

watsit said:
I'm not sure what these are intended for, but I think aliasing to art_request would be better. Requested art sounds like an image that was requested, i.e. the result of a request, instead of actively requesting something.

That's the point, all three of those tags revolve around art that has been requested. I thought the same way at first until I looked into the tags

If the requested_art tag refers to art that has been requested by somebody it should probably be invalidated the same way free_art, commission, adoptable, etc. have been.

faucet said:
If the requested_art tag refers to art that has been requested by somebody it should probably be invalidated the same way free_art, commission, adoptable, etc. have been.

I didn't realize those were all invalidated actually, though I definitely agree on that, maybe make the other tags that were going to be aliased to it invalid as well

Actually, it seems like the tag might be useful for things like post #2544421

I found this one under the requested_art tag, though of the images included in those three tags, this is the only one that seems to fit.

I see these kinds of images fairly often (images where there’s a comment requesting or suggesting art in the image itself - perhaps art_suggestion would even be better), but I didn’t realize until now that we probably don’t really have a tag for it.

scaliespe said:
Actually, it seems like the tag might be useful for things like post #2544421

I found this one under the requested_art tag, though of the images included in those three tags, this is the only one that seems to fit.

I see these kinds of images fairly often (images where there’s a comment requesting or suggesting art in the image itself - perhaps art_suggestion would even be better), but I didn’t realize until now that we probably don’t really have a tag for it.

I think ask_blog might be close enough to be used on that post

requested_art and ych_result should both be invalidated, since they don't indicate anything about the art itself and are rather pointless.

watsit said:
requested_art and ych_result should both be invalidated, since they don't indicate anything about the art itself and are rather pointless.

I don't think ych_result should be invalidated, because otherwise multiple sets of different photos from the same YCH could be seen as duplicates and deleted even if the lineart is altered drastically. The wiki page as of right now shows a perfect example

cringebird said:
I don't think ych_result should be invalidated, because otherwise multiple sets of different photos from the same YCH could be seen as duplicates and deleted even if the lineart is altered drastically. The wiki page as of right now shows a perfect example

I get what you mean, I'll add ych_result to the meta part of the BUR unless there are any objections

cringebird said:
I don't think ych_result should be invalidated, because otherwise multiple sets of different photos from the same YCH could be seen as duplicates and deleted even if the lineart is altered drastically.

Up to 5 variations of the same base are allowed (which should be connected by parent/child properties), and it doesn't matter if they're from a YCH or not.

watsit said:
Up to 5 variations of the same base are allowed (which should be connected by parent/child properties), and it doesn't matter if they're from a YCH or not.

I still think if it is from a YCH it should be properly marked

cringebird said:
I still think if it is from a YCH it should be properly marked

I see no reason why. Whether it's commission art, YCH art, request art, gift art, personal art, etc, doesn't really matter for tagging purposes.

watsit said:
I see no reason why. Whether it's commission art, YCH art, request art, gift art, personal art, etc, doesn't really matter for tagging purposes.

But if it's art from the same base some people may think it's traced depending on how far apart the uploads are

cringebird said:
But if it's art from the same base some people may think it's traced depending on how far apart the uploads are

It hasn't been a problem so far for non-YCH alts.

watsit said:
It hasn't been a problem so far for non-YCH alts.

There's a difference between alts and YCH. A YCH is a whole new character in the same scenario

cringebird said:
There's a difference between alts and YCH. A YCH is a whole new character in the same scenario

Up to 5 similar non-sequential alts are allowed. Whether it's a YCH or not, and whether it's a whole new character or not, doesn't matter.
post #2745046 and post #2745050
Those two count toward the same alt limit, even though it's different characters. Being a YCH changes nothing about it, and certainly wouldn't be a free pass around the alt limit. I think you're looking for a problem where there isn't one.

watsit said:
Up to 5 similar non-sequential alts are allowed. Whether it's a YCH or not, and whether it's a whole new character or not, doesn't matter.
post #2745046 and post #2745050
Those two count toward the same alt limit, even though it's different characters. Being a YCH changes nothing about it, and certainly wouldn't be a free pass around the alt limit. I think you're looking for a problem where there isn't one.

i understand they all count towards the same alt limit but at the same time it should be made clear when something is just an image alt (like a color alt of the same character or a fetish alt) and when something is a YCH

cringebird said:
i understand they all count towards the same alt limit but at the same time it should be made clear when something is just an image alt (like a color alt of the same character or a fetish alt) and when something is a YCH

I see what you’re getting at, but what if an artist does the same thing with multiples of their own characters? Then it’s not technically a YCH, even though it appears the same way to us.

Maybe we use a tag like character_swap or alternate_character instead?

yes but i am specifically talking about YCHs, character color swaps are a different thing entirely and that is what i am trying to say

cringebird said:
yes but i am specifically talking about YCHs

But what about YCHs specifically needs special consideration, that wouldn't also apply if the same images were made in a non-YCH context? Whether or not an image or set of images are a result of a YCH has no bearing on whether it's allowed here or not, and says nothing about what's in the image itself. Note also that the presence of other images is considered outside information, so it violates TWYS to tag an image based on other images (e.g. that there are character swaps doesn't factor into a given post's tags).

YCHs can be altered line art wise to include different species, hair, etc. Color alts can not

cringebird said:
YCHs can be altered line art wise to include different species, hair, etc. Color alts can not

Non-YCHs can be altered line art wise to include different species, hair, etc, too. A YCH can also just be color alts. And in either case:

uploading guidelines says:

• Image sets where a single "base" is reused multiple times with only minor edits (and no story or natural progression) are not allowed.
• Small excerpts (up to 5 at a time) are okay, though.

Nothing about color, line art, species, hair, etc, is mentioned. Just whether the image, taken as a whole, is minorly or majorly edited from others of the same base. An image being a YCH or not has absolutely no bearing on this.

So what you're saying is a crocodile and an alligator are the same creature because they only have slight differences? No, that's stupid. YCHs and color alts are different enough to where a tag should be warranted, much like how crocodiles and alligators have separate tags

If this YCH debate goes on further I'm afraid it'll hinder the BUR as a whole so I'll move it to a separate post