Topic: [APPROVED] Remove species -> humanoid implications [BUR]

The bulk update request #5220 is active.

Reason: Characters of a species can nearly always be drawn in another form, while still being recognizable as that species. This is why we don't usually imply species -> form.
Most common situation is an instance of a species crossing the line over to anthro, but other situations have happened.
One way that is always possible is a hybrid.
The most extreme examples are generally taur, so I'll just give a bunch of examples of species in this list as taur:
post #2525292 post #358464 post #1296676 post #2863985 post #4054748 post #3622552 post #3560809 post #3470307 post #3955499

EDIT: The bulk update request #5220 (forum #370734) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #5221 is active.

Reason: Remove implications, part 2

EDIT: The bulk update request #5221 (forum #370735) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

Re-add transient implications (can't create BUR until after part 2)

scth said:
Re-add transient implications (can't create BUR until after part 2)

part 3

implicate zabrak -> alien
implicate petrosapien -> mineral_fauna
implicate petrosapien -> alien
implicate galvanic_mechamorph -> alien
implicate tetramand -> alien
implicate nemuina -> alien
implicate fellpool -> felid
implicate au_ra -> scalie
implicate mudokon -> alien
implicate vulcan -> alien
implicate deku_scrub -> flora_fauna
implicate roswell_grey -> alien
implicate vortian -> alien
implicate irken -> alien
implicate puazi -> alien
implicate togruta -> alien
implicate floran -> flora_fauna
implicate twi'lek -> alien
implicate ctarl-ctarl -> felid
implicate viera -> lagomorph
implicate miqo'te -> feline
implicate na'vi -> alien
implicate drell -> alien
implicate quarian -> alien

I still don't like the alien tag and would like to see it go away. It's entirely lore-based, has no common visual aspects, and isn't consistent in meaning either (in some settings, demons are aliens, in some settings they're interdimensional beings instead of interplanetary, in some settings any non-human creature is an alien (while humans aren't even in settings that aren't human-focused), in some settings humans are aliens and may or may not be tagged as such).

watsit said:
I still don't like the alien tag and would like to see it go away. It's entirely lore-based, has no common visual aspects, and isn't consistent in meaning either (in some settings, demons are aliens, in some settings they're interdimensional beings instead of interplanetary, in some settings any non-human creature is an alien (while humans aren't even in settings that aren't human-focused), in some settings humans are aliens and may or may not be tagged as such).

plenty of species tags are totally lore based, that doesn't mean that they're irrelevant. there's pokemon_(species), digimon_(species), deity, demon, monster, spirit, pretty much any fictional species designation. they're still useful tags.

sipothac said:
plenty of species tags are totally lore based, that doesn't mean that they're irrelevant. there's pokemon_(species), digimon_(species), deity, demon, monster, spirit, pretty much any fictional species designation. they're still useful tags.

I'm not that thrilled with deity either, for the same reason. Demon has (or at least should have) visual aspects that look demonic, and spirit should have some ghostly or ethereal look to them, though I do find them to be at the edge of acceptability. Pokemon and Digimon are a specific defined set of species, it's not the same as just saying something is an alien and tagging it as such regardless of how it looks. We've had plenty of other cases where a species has been invalidated for being able to look like anything and be entirely at the whim of the creator (mimiffs anyone?).

Wait, are taurs with humanoid upper halfs not supposed to be tagged humanoid? I thought humanoid was for any human faced character

cloudpie said:
Wait, are taurs with humanoid upper halfs not supposed to be tagged humanoid? I thought humanoid was for any human faced character

for most split_form characters anthro and humanoid (and rarely feral) can be used. since taur is considered its own seperate form using those tags would be in conflict, so humanoid_taur is used for human(oid) upper-half taurs. _{not to be confused with human_taur, which is something else.}

darryus said:
for most split_form characters anthro and humanoid (and rarely feral) can be used. since taur is considered its own seperate form using those tags would be in conflict, so humanoid_taur is used for human upper-half taurs.

I see, thanks!

watsit said:
I still don't like the alien tag and would like to see it go away. It's entirely lore-based, has no common visual aspects, and isn't consistent in meaning either (in some settings, demons are aliens, in some settings they're interdimensional beings instead of interplanetary, in some settings any non-human creature is an alien (while humans aren't even in settings that aren't human-focused), in some settings humans are aliens and may or may not be tagged as such).

I disagree, it's pretty obvious what is and isn't an alien. Mass Effect Aliens, Movie franchise Aliens, Irkens, Roswell Greys, original species aliens, aliens from popular books...what you're talking about? The alien tag is super helpful. I ACTUALLY USE THAT TAG.
Is it not okay to have a tag that covers a broad spectrum for people who want to look up such things as Aliens, Dieties, Demons, etc?

watsit said:
I'm not that thrilled with deity either, for the same reason. Demon has (or at least should have) visual aspects that look demonic, and spirit should have some ghostly or ethereal look to them, though I do find them to be at the edge of acceptability. Pokemon and Digimon are a specific defined set of species, it's not the same as just saying something is an alien and tagging it as such regardless of how it looks. We've had plenty of other cases where a species has been invalidated for being able to look like anything and be entirely at the whim of the creator (mimiffs anyone?).

closetpossum said:
I disagree, it's pretty obvious what is and isn't an alien. Mass Effect Aliens, Movie franchise Aliens, Irkens, Roswell Greys, original species aliens, aliens from popular books...what you're talking about? The alien tag is super helpful. I ACTUALLY USE THAT TAG.
Is it not okay to have a tag that covers a broad spectrum for people who want to look up such things as Aliens, Dieties, Demons, etc?

I would agree both that alien is a dumpster fire of a tag, and that it serves a necessary purpose. There are many creatures which are considered by the popular imagination to "look like aliens," and many who do not. There should be a way to search for or blacklist them.

roswell grey, galvan (ben 10), irken, and many others like these fit the stereotypical "alien" mold quite well. This tag should be for stuff like this.

Then there's a different "feral alien" archetype (maybe could be put in a different tag? or have these two archetypes both imply alien) which includes things like xenomorph and tyranid. Usually either arthropod-esque or mollusk-esque creatures, usually more on the horror side of alien media.

But the tag is also unfortunately implied by things which are strictly aliens by lore - you could not look at a wookiee, for example, and say that it is definitively an alien if you are not already familiar with Star Wars. It just looks like some furry anthro thing. A lot of tags that imply alien currently are just lore based in this way, and really deserve to be excluded from the tag.

It's a mess we'll have to deal with eventually.

scaliespe said:
*snip*

I mean, the problem is that stuff like alien, demon, etc. is never going to be a visually definable since they don't exist. even if we just go by real-life folklore, various cultures around the world have wildly differing visions of what these things are like, a roswell_grey looks nothing like a flatwoods_monster and an oni looks nothing like a caprine_demon. tagging fictional species designations using only visuals is never going to be possible, everyone's definition of what an alien or whatever is is going to be different.

the only two possible endgames for tags like these are either...
1) what we're currently doing by saying "if it says it's an <alien>, it's an <alien>", or...
2) we nuke and invalidate the tags.

I don't know why treating it as a lore-based tag is a problem, TWYS is mostly just for general tags and real animals, some amount of external knowledge is going to be needed for anything beyond that.

sipothac said:
I mean, the problem is that stuff like alien, demon, etc. is never going to be a visually definable since they don't exist. even if we just go by real-life folklore, various cultures around the world have wildly differing visions of what these things are like, a roswell_grey looks nothing like a flatwoods_monster and an oni looks nothing like a caprine_demon. tagging fictional species designations using only visuals is never going to be possible, everyone's definition of what an alien or whatever is is going to be different.

the only two possible endgames for tags like these are either...
1) what we're currently doing by saying "if it says it's an <alien>, it's an <alien>", or...
2) we nuke and invalidate the tags.

I don't know why treating it as a lore-based tag is a problem, TWYS is mostly just for general tags and real animals, some amount of external knowledge is going to be needed for anything beyond that.

I think it would make more sense to change them to extraterrestrial_(lore) demon_(lore) for example than outright removing them, if they are a problem.

Oh hey, there was already a BUR to fix the post I just found:

post #4379956

It looks like topic #11255 is the guilty party.

Bump. Species shouldn't imply form

The bulk update request #5220 (forum #370734) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #5221 (forum #370735) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

scth said:
Re-add transient implications (can't create BUR until after part 2)

part 3

implicate zabrak -> alien
implicate petrosapien -> mineral_fauna
implicate petrosapien -> alien
implicate galvanic_mechamorph -> alien
implicate tetramand -> alien
implicate nemuina -> alien
implicate fellpool -> felid
implicate au_ra -> scalie
implicate mudokon -> alien
implicate vulcan -> alien
implicate deku_scrub -> flora_fauna
implicate roswell_grey -> alien
implicate vortian -> alien
implicate irken -> alien
implicate puazi -> alien
implicate togruta -> alien
implicate floran -> flora_fauna
implicate twi'lek -> alien
implicate ctarl-ctarl -> felid
implicate viera -> lagomorph
implicate miqo'te -> feline
implicate na'vi -> alien
implicate drell -> alien
implicate quarian -> alien

Any opinions on the alien implications?

snpthecat said:
Any opinions on the alien implications?

time to open this can of worms again

I'm fine with this BUR going into effect, but people in the past have definitely had opinions on the validity of alien under TWYS, and especially opinions on implicating specific species to the tag.

The bulk update request #7182 is active.

create implication zabrak (76) -> alien (90363)
create implication petrosapien (136) -> alien (90363)
create implication galvanic_mechamorph (125) -> alien (90363)
create implication tetramand (425) -> alien (90363)
create implication nemuina (78) -> alien (90363)
create implication mudokon (45) -> alien (90363)
create implication vulcan (44) -> alien (90363)
create implication roswell_grey (652) -> alien (90363)
create implication vortian (28) -> alien (90363)
create implication irken (1027) -> alien (90363)
create implication puazi (115) -> alien (90363)
create implication togruta (564) -> alien (90363)
create implication twi'lek (897) -> alien (90363)
create implication na'vi (717) -> alien (90363)
create implication drell (49) -> alien (90363)
create implication quarian (1086) -> alien (90363)

Reason: Let's see the votes on it. I'm separating them into alien and non-alien implications

EDIT: The bulk update request #7182 (forum #396732) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #7183 is active.

create implication viera (1101) -> lagomorph (327889)
create implication miqo'te (3500) -> feline (537898)
create implication ctarl-ctarl (424) -> felid (820780)
create implication floran (444) -> flora_fauna (29431)
create implication petrosapien (136) -> mineral_fauna (3379)
create implication fellpool (10) -> felid (820780)
create implication au_ra (1447) -> scalie (751944)

Reason: Non-alien implications

EDIT: The bulk update request #7183 (forum #396733) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #7183 (forum #396733) has been approved by @slyroon.

The bulk update request #7182 (forum #396732) has been approved by @slyroon.

I know this is already an active BUR, but almost every example used in this BUR still implied humanoid_taur which... implies humanoid, thus removing humanoid a bit perplexing.

rakustrike said:
I know this is already an active BUR, but almost every example used in this BUR still implied humanoid_taur which... implies humanoid, thus removing humanoid a bit perplexing.

humanoid_taur does not imply humanoid.

nimphia said:
humanoid_taur does not imply humanoid.

Should have clarified I meant the tag name itself implies humanoid not the tag itself.

rakustrike said:
Should have clarified I meant the tag name itself implies humanoid not the tag itself.

Yes, because the upper half is humanoid. But we don't tag taurs with anthro upper halves as anthro.