Before I request the BUR I wanted some feedback:
alternate_species is basically "character is normally drawn as X, while here they're drawn as Y", which isn't TWYS by definition.
You could argue that the same applies to furrification, humanized, humanoidized, ponification and dragonification because they already imply alternate_species, but I'm not sure about them.
Lore might also apply to the alternate_form family of tags, but I'm not sure here either.

You do have a point. The tags you mentioned are pretty much referring to characters who are different from their “usual”/“canonical” form or species. By definition they fall outside the TWYS rule, because you cannot tell just by visuals that it’s an alternate form/species of the original (unless you put two of the same character in different forms side to side).

Converting them into lore tags sounds good.

This, and also crossgender, aged_up, aged_down, and (if incest isn't allowed) all the familial relationship tags.

wat8548 said:
This, and also crossgender, aged_up, aged_down, and (if incest isn't allowed) all the familial relationship tags.

incest is already lore: incest_(lore). I remember someone opened a BUR for lore crossgender very recently but I cannot find the thread again.
I agree on the aged_* tags, but in a different BUR to keep things cleaner

About ponification: it currently does not imply alternate_species nor alternate_form, probably because it depends on the character: if it originally is an equine character then it'd be alternate_form, otherwise it'd be alternate_species.
I'll put it in the lore category anyway, but in another BUR.
I still don't know what to do about the alternate_form group of tags

Also, I'd need to actually create the *_(lore) tags before this works

shadyguy said:
incest is already lore: incest_(lore).

Incidentally, tags like brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, brothers, sisters, brother_and_sister, mother_and_daughter, father_and_son, etc, aren't lore, even though familial relations aren't a visible trait. You can't tell these two characters are siblings any more than these two, by looking at them.

watsit said:
Incidentally, tags like brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, brothers, sisters, brother_and_sister, mother_and_daughter, father_and_son, etc, aren't lore, even though familial relations aren't a visible trait. You can't tell these two characters are siblings any more than these two, by looking at them.

I agree, they should be changed as well.
Every lore tag must end in _(lore) though, so for every tag we have to do the unalias-unimply-rename-realias-reimply dance

shadyguy said:
I agree, they should be changed as well.
Every lore tag must end in _(lore) though, so for every tag we have to do the unalias-unimply-rename-realias-reimply dance

That’s quite the ride the tags have to go through 😁, but at the end of the day they will make more sense once they are categorized as “lore” tags.

watsit said:
Incidentally, tags like brother, sister, mother, father, son, daughter, brothers, sisters, brother_and_sister, mother_and_daughter, father_and_son, etc, aren't lore, even though familial relations aren't a visible trait. You can't tell these two characters are siblings any more than these two, by looking at them.

Yes, that was what I was talking about (I thought it was more obvious than that). The main problem here is that there's no umbrella tag (incest can't be used as one for obvious reasons), so you can't easily use an automated tool and be sure you've caught everything. While we're tracking down all of these tags, we should create a relative_(lore) tag and imply all of them, including incest_(lore), to it. I found a wiki page called tag group:character_relations, but even that says it's non-exhaustive. (Also, which joker added pantsing to the "Other" section at the bottom?)

BTW, check out the hellish list of aliases for grandparent_and_grandchild. Was all of that really necessary?

wat8548 said
BTW, check out the hellish list of aliases for grandparent_and_grandchild. Was all of that really necessary?

But what if people think grand_parents_and_grandchildss is the correct tag? Can’t have that happen. Better alias it.

The bulk update request #1508 is pending approval.

remove implication humanized (3781) -> human (378339)
remove implication humanized (3781) -> alternate_species (36843)
remove alias kemonomimi_mode (0) -> humanoidized (7312)
remove implication humanoidized (7312) -> humanoid (456892)
remove implication humanoidized (7312) -> alternate_species (36843)
remove alias furrified (0) -> furrification (8164)
remove implication furrification (8164) -> alternate_species (36843)
remove implication dragonification (271) -> dragon (363295)
remove implication dragonification (271) -> alternate_species (36843)
remove alias alternative_species (0) -> alternate_species (36843)
remove alias species_swap (0) -> alternate_species (36843)

Reason: See topic: tags are inherently not TWYS and will get aliased to their _(lore) counterparts

Giving a thumbs up only under the concept that they will be later aliased to the same tag just suffixed with _(lore)

furrin_gok said:
Giving a thumbs up only under the concept that they will be later aliased to the same tag just suffixed with _(lore)

Obviously, see the complete BUR 8 messages above

Bump, I'm interested in how the community will receive this BUR now

snpthecat said:
Bump, I'm interested in how the community will receive this BUR now

I'd kind of prefer if the lore category was kept mostly to more, like, intrinsic character traits. something about moving the "alt*"s over there just feel's wrong; sitting next to the gender ID and familial relations tags, and the like.

honestly, over time, I'm not even sure I like incest_(lore) being in there.

dba_afish said:
I'd kind of prefer if the lore category was kept mostly to more, like, intrinsic character traits. something about moving the "alt*"s over there just feel's wrong; sitting next to the gender ID and familial relations tags, and the like.

honestly, over time, I'm not even sure I like incest_(lore) being in there.

The problem is we have nowhere else to house incest lore and alt*. artist,copyright,invalid,meta,species are all out of the question.

For the remaining two choices
character is very questionable, and it doesn't exactly fit general as it's not very twys

And it's pretty unlikely that we'll get a new category, given that the contributor category that's been heavily requested hasn't arrived

snpthecat said:
The problem is we have nowhere else to house incest lore and alt*. artist,copyright,invalid,meta,species are all out of the question.

For the remaining two choices
character is very questionable, and it doesn't exactly fit general as it's not very twys

And it's pretty unlikely that we'll get a new category, given that the contributor category that's been heavily requested hasn't arrived

the other thing is that while incest_(lore) is at least tagged on the same "artist's intent" standard that all the other lore category tags use, alt* is more based on the general concencus around what's "canon" for a character. for example, soneone drawing Tails as a girl would be crossgender whether or not the artist believed that old rumor that the character was a girl in the original japanese Sonic 2.