The bulk update request #4245 is pending approval.

create alias canon_conforming_body_shape (14) -> on_model (9340)

Reason: It feels like on_model is doing double duty when it really shouldn't.

on_model

Depictions of copyrighted characters which are, regardless of subject matter, stylistically nigh-indistinguishable from the original source material, whether it's the art style or the characters' body proportions closely resembles how they look in official media.

off_model → alternate_form

This tag is used when a character is redone in a noticeably different way compared to their usual appearance, although still being the same individual (and usually, but not always, still being the same species).

style_parody

A type of parody in which the art style of another series or artist is applied to another work of art. It doesn't require any reference to the work the art is from.

Why does on_model cover both the character's apparent proportions/body-type and the style they're being portrayed in? Why does style_parody have the specific requirement of being a mismatched style?

post #3842770
This imitates Undertale's visual style, but Toriel doesn't look like this. This is a style_parody that is not on_model.

post #3678338
This is what a Minecraft bee looks like, but the illustration is not emulating any particular style, Minecraft or otherwise. This is on_model but not a style_parody.

post #1979707
Sonic looks like this in official art, both in terms of proportion and aesthetics, but it's not official art. on_model and style_parody should both be able to fit here with no issue.

post #3509837
Toriel, an Undertale character, depicted as an external_style_parody of The Simpsons.

lafcadio said:
Why does on_model cover both the character's apparent proportions/body-type and the style they're being portrayed in? Why does style_parody have the specific requirement of being a mismatched style?

Because that's their point. on_model is when you want to find depictions of a character that could be confused for an official depiction, while style_parody is for finding a character in a different distinct style.

lafcadio said:
post #3842770
This imitates Undertale's visual style, but Toriel doesn't look like this. This is a style_parody that is not on_model.

I wouldn't call that a style parody since it's not a clearly distinct style being parodied. It's just not strictly on-model like most art here.

lafcadio said:
post #3678338
This is what a Minecraft bee looks like, but the illustration is not emulating any particular style, Minecraft or otherwise. This is on_model but not a style_parody.

I wouldn't call that on_model, since it's clearly distinct from official depictions (more shape detail and rounded edges, compared to the flat boxy shapes of the game).

lafcadio said:
post #1979707
Sonic looks like this in official art, both in terms of proportion and aesthetics, but it's not official art. on_model and style_parody should both be able to fit here with no issue.

That should not be style_parody since it's not "the art style of another series or artist", it's an official character in their normal style.

lafcadio said:
post #3509837
Toriel, an Undertale character, depicted as an external_style_parody of The Simpsons.

This would be style_parody. external_style_parody seems redundant since style_parody already requires it to be a different/"external" style.

watsit said:
Because that's their point. on_model is when you want to find depictions of a character that could be confused for an official depiction, while style_parody is for finding a character in a different distinct style.

I wouldn't call that a style parody since it's not a clearly distinct style being parodied.

I wouldn't call that on_model, since it's clearly distinct from official depictions (more shape detail and rounded edges, compared to the flat boxy shapes of the game).

It's not a parody, it's an official character in their normal style, not the style of another series or artist.

This would be style_parody. external_style_parody seems redundant since style_parody already requires it to be a different/"external" style.

This reply comes off like you parsed the words but did not actually make any effort to understand what I'm trying to communicate. Yes, currently the tag's point is that it can be both of those things, but I think it is unbelievably, world-shatteringly stupid to unite two disparate concepts under the same tag. This is like if human_on_feral included humans sitting on ferals.

post #2838177

Behold, human_on_feral!

lafcadio said:
This reply comes off like you parsed the words but did not actually make any effort to understand what I'm trying to communicate. Yes, currently the tag's point is that it can be both of those things, but I think it is unbelievably, world-shatteringly stupid to unite two disparate concepts under the same tag. This is like if human_on_feral included humans sitting on ferals.

I think you're misunderstanding one or more of these tags. on_model and style_parody should be mutually exclusive. on_model is

Depictions of copyrighted characters which are, regardless of subject matter, stylistically nigh-indistinguishable from the original source material, whether it's the art style or the characters' body proportions closely resembles how they look in official media.

I don't see what's double-duty about this? If an official character looks "stylistically nigh-indistinguishable from the original source material", it's tagged on_model. If it doesn't, it's not. What's being doubled-up here?

lafcadio said:
create alias on_style (213) -> style_parody (719)

This alias is wrong since style_parody is specifically when it's not on-style (on_model?). I'm not even sure what on_style is supposed to be, since the wiki is written in unparsable broken english

On style is when a art is created in the original style by the creator himself

Like
---) the amazing world of gumball
---)deltarune

The best I can get out of this makes it sound identical to on_model, when the art is in the same style as the source material.

lafcadio said:
create implication external_style_parody (0) -> style_parody (719)

Not even sure what external_style_parody is supposed to be, or how it's supposed to be different from style_parody, since there's nothing with that tag and it has no wiki.

I understand exactly how the tag on_model is being used and it's frankly insulting that you're rolling up to do this weird debate-club gimmick with this half-baked understanding.

youjomodoki doesn't do the Pokemon style yet their stuff constantly gets the tag (on_model youjomodoki), because there are people who want to communicate interest in "accurate" portrayals of Pokemon that aren't sexed-up approximations.

watsit said:
post #3842770
I wouldn't call that a style parody since it's not a clearly distinct style being parodied. It's just not strictly on-model like most art here.

And this reply is just patently ridiculous if you have ever looked at an Undertale screenshot for even a split second. That's what Undertale looks like, and that's depicting Toriel, but that's not what Toriel looks like in Undertale.

post #2416410
This is a dead ringer for the Yuji Uekawa style but Rouge does not look like that.

post #694945
Dr. Shrunk is proportioned like this, but this is not what the official Animal Crossing illustrations look like.

lafcadio said:
I understand exactly how the tag on_model is being used and it's frankly insulting that you're rolling up to do this weird debate-club gimmick with this half-baked understanding.

If I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, you can try to explain it better without having to be insulting ("did not actually make any effort to understand what I'm trying to communicate", "rolling up to do this weird debate-club gimmick with this half-baked understanding"). Debating and discussing issues is what these threads are for, and if there's a misunderstanding, you don't need to insinuate I'm being purposefully obtuse and dumb, without even trying to clarify what I'm so obviously not getting.

If it's a problem with how the tags are being used (vs how the wiki defines them), you didn't make that clear in your previous posts. But fine then. In that case, what exactly are you proposing, and what is the goal of these aliases and implications (given that the tag being implicated is unused and undefined, and it looks like you're trying to alias a tag to its opposite)?

If you want to change and split the tags because they're not focused enough for you, you haven't explained how you want to split them. You just gave post examples saying how they should be tagged, without explaining how you want to change the tags. What tags do you want, and how do you want to define them?

If neither of this is what you mean, can you please clarify? What exactly is the issue with the current tags? What do you want to do to them? How do these aliases and implications help?

lafcadio said:
youjomodoki doesn't do the Pokemon style yet their stuff constantly gets the tag (on_model youjomodoki), because there are people who want to communicate interest in "accurate" portrayals of Pokemon that aren't sexed-up approximations.

There's always going to be instances where it can be taken either way, not just for this tag but many others too. Sometimes people will disagree if it's close enough to source material to count for the tag, and youjomodoki's pokemon art is done in a way that many people (myself included) interpret as being close to the official style, even if you could grab some official art and point out differences when put side-by-side (there will always be some differences, short of being an exact copy of an official image, so it will come down to whether there's enough difference). Them being "sexed-up" is explicitly not taken into account for the tag ("regardless of subject matter"), and I don't see an additional tag excluding adult portrayals in a similar style (there is the rating you can add to searches and blacklists).

lafcadio said:
And this reply is just patently ridiculous if you have ever looked at an Undertale screenshot for even a split second. That's what Undertale looks like, and that's depicting Toriel, but that's not what Toriel looks like in Undertale.

And how does that change what I said? A style_parody is when something from one series/franchise/whatever is drawn in the style of another series/franchise/whatever. So that's not a style_parody since the UI and backround stuff looks like its source material. While Toriel is distinguishable from the source material, but also not in the style of another series/franchise/whatever, so is not on_model or style_parody.

Incidentally, alternate_form looks like a badly defined tag. In all other instances, "form" refers to a character being feral, anthro, humanoid, or taur, and ambiguous_form is for when you don't see enough of a character to tell if they're anthro, or feral, or humanoid, or something else. alternate_form would then suggest a character that is normally one form drawn in a different form (an canonically anthro character drawn as a feral, or a canonically feral character drawn as a humanoid, for example). But it's wiki just has an ultra-vague "redone in a noticeably different way", and gives examples where characters are in their original form (e.g. a feral character still as a feral, just different). Sometimes it's for alternate_color, sometimes it's just a character in the artist's own style, sometimes it is for a character in a different form. That seems like a tag pulling multi-duty and should be split.

Watsit I cannot stress to you enough how much confusion your tone causes. You always sound like you're scolding someone. Not even necessarily what you're saying, just... how you say it.

strikerman said:
Watsit I cannot stress to you enough how much confusion your tone causes. You always sound like you're scolding someone. Not even necessarily what you're saying, just... how you say it.

Sorry. I have a hard time communicating, constantly worrying if I'm being perceived as I sound to myself (which is only worse over text where a lot of how I'm intending to say something is lost). I'm still not great at it.

Having had the opportunity to sleep on this I've decided to change the tag pair from "style_parody"/"external_style_parody" to "on_style"/"style_parody" and removed the implication. I am, however, preserving the canon_conforming_(etc) alias and continuing to indicate interest in changing how on_model is used.

Unfortunately, topic #24644 is blocking style_emulation-related aliases so this is something that's going to require some manual fixes.

The tag relationships I'm proposing now are, in essence:

on_style: "official art" styles.
style_parody: "official art" styles from media unrelated to the characters portrayed.
on_model: same model/proportions build, whether the style is the same or not.

It really feels like I'm just endlessly repeating myself, but: I do not see any reason to marry "looks like the style of (X)" to "looks like how (character from X) looks in their home media" with on_model. We are clearly happy with separating things like lucario and mega_lucario, and zoroark and hisuian_zoroark for improved searching, and this is expanding that very same concept. For people who want to see both of the things that on_model currently showcases, then ~on_model ~on_style will do just that. For people who're interested in one but not the other, such as disproportionate on-style representations of Toriel, then on_style -on_model should eventually be able to do just that.

Undertale's style for battle sprites, simply put, is black and white. On Toriel's sprite in particular, a 1px white outline is used to define an outline for her clothing, but even the hands (see Loox's sprite) and eyes/eyebrows (see Toriel's alt expression sprites) look like how they're represented in Undertale. There aren't many examples of legs and feet in Undertale's combat sprites, but Aaron's arms give us an idea of what that might look like. In all, while the style is an exceptionally simple one versus the myriad other examples for on_style and style_parody, what is there is still very much recognizable as an Undertale-influenced style, to say nothing of the other battle screen elements.

post #3856076

Dead ringer for the GBA Pokemon style. The human can't necessarily be a Pokemon character, so I certainly wouldn't tag on_model based on their appearance alone, but the Gardevoir is definitely not on_model by any stretch of the imagination (noticeable breasts, weird dress-thing has been excised). In this case, at least that bit of tagging seems to be correct, but there are three different "style"-related tags on the post. Oh no. Yet, though, we can recognize a deliberate invocation of the GBA/DS style. What we can see of the human's limbs are similarly proportioned, the color choice is similar, and there's also the multi-colored outlines which are very much a staple of the style. On the left arm alone, there are three different shades of black/grey that get used for outlining.

post #3784333

The characters here, substitute_doll, lokix, and palafin_(hero_form) all look roughly how we'd expect proportionally, but the style is a mismatch. The off-white, the colored onomatopoeia with broad strokes, and the slight offset between the line work and coloring are all very evocative of the style of old American superhero comics,

It genuinely is as simple as making it so that on_model doesn't take stylistic considerations into account, instead letting on_style and style_parody assume that role, and aliasing other style/model-related tags away. Youjomodoki taggers are clearly happy using it in the exact way I'm suggesting, this same interest in "on-model" characters in particular is not an uncommon sentiment among /vp/ and /trash/ users, and clearly at least one of those wikis was due for a facelift anyway.

lafcadio said:
The bulk update request #4245 is pending approval.

create alias canon_conforming_body_shape (14) -> on_model (9340)

Reason: It feels like on_model is doing double duty when it really shouldn't.

on_model
off_model → alternate_form
style_parody
Why does on_model cover both the character's apparent proportions/body-type and the style they're being portrayed in? Why does style_parody have the specific requirement of being a mismatched style?

post #3842770
This imitates Undertale's visual style, but Toriel doesn't look like this. This is a style_parody that is not on_model.

post #3678338
This is what a Minecraft bee looks like, but the illustration is not emulating any particular style, Minecraft or otherwise. This is on_model but not a style_parody.

post #1979707
Sonic looks like this in official art, both in terms of proportion and aesthetics, but it's not official art. on_model and style_parody should both be able to fit here with no issue.

post #3509837
Toriel, an Undertale character, depicted as an external_style_parody of The Simpsons.

I'm supporting this just for the fact that "canon_conforming_body_shape" is an horrendous name for a tag and seems rather redundant, but you're not helping your case with these fairly bad takes. I am not trying to be mean or anything I think more people would have supported this if it wasn't the misunderstanding you have over these tags. To be fair, if it doesn't pass I hope it gets nuked instead.

I think this discussion is interesting, because I identified the same problem with on_model. Some people tag it as the character having similar body proportions, even though it's in a distinct art style.

"On model" is an animation industry term that usually means that the character follows the reference sheet. This means that it must have the correct body proportions AND be in the official art style by using the sheet. The point is to look at the picture at a glance think it could be official for a sec.

The following are on_model, the style and proportions looks very similar to the actual show/game/comic, and could fool someone at a glance.

post #4018635
post #4017768
post #3371488
post #3969503
post #3650676

This concept would be very strict, though
By that definition, the majority of bikomation content is not on_model because is more cartoony than the official CG style models from the anime.

These have correct character proportions, but not on model depictions in that sense, even though they are tagged with it.

post #2729946
post #3169105
post #3186762

We would need a tag for when the proportions are correct and for when the style is correct, but on_model would mean both at the same time. This means this tag should be broken in two.

I lean on correct_proportions (or canon, or official) and style_emulation. Style emulation sounds like it could be any style, and not only official franchises though. style_parody sounds like it should be comedic and have character with official styles from different franchises.

Any suggestions?