Should the canon_couple tag be used on transformation sequences in which the characters start off as OCs/fan characters, and then transform into the official characters?

The reason I ask is because the canon_couple wiki page says "no fan characters and such" - does that mean that the tag should not be used on images where OCs are seen in the "before" images?

A few examples of the different ways these TFs can be depicted, which might affect whether the tag applies:

• These two images show the end result, where the TF'd characters end up indistinguishable from the official characters:

post #1632357 post #3655806

• In these we only see them mid_transformation:

post #332776 post #2956518 post #2151925

• And here's one that at first glance looks like a canon couple; the fact she wasn't always Amy is only given away by the the parent image and the after_transformation and OC's name tags:

post #2917487

Which of those images should or should not have the canon_couple tag?

Should that Sonic/Amy image have canon_couple (because that's how it appears; TWYS etc), and/or canon_x_oc (because trevor-fox_(character), the OC who TF'd into Amy, is tagged in the image)?

(Related: I found this recent topic about the canon_x_oc tag which might be relevant: topic #36420)

My first instinct is to say that if they're tagged as the characters then yes, they should be tagged as a canon couple, but I'd like to hear other opinions on this.

My evaluation on this is that if the image
Shows the characters who are a canon_couple together,
and the transformed characters are indistinguishable or have only very minor differences from how the official characters would be depicted,
it would be ok to tag as canon_couple.

So after transformation is ok, at the very end of the transformation would be ok, the examples given for mid transformations wouldn't qualify since they're too much on an amalgamation of the original character with the official character.

And likewise, if the official character is transforming into an original character, then canon_couple would only apply at the start of the transformation and not the middle or the end.

Also stuff like a character fusion of an official character with another character should not count as the official character for the purposes of canon_couple

IMO, it would depend if they "act" like the character (or I guess, still act like their original self) or not. Characters are TWYK, not TWYS; you tag a character if the artist says it's them, rather than it looking like them^[1] (otherwise the alternate_* and *_crossgender tags would be pointless). An original/fan character transforming to look like a canon character doesn't necessarily make them the canon character, it could just be that original/fan character in the guise of someone else. A character that transforms to look like another's partner, but still acts as themselves and clearly isn't acting like their partner, I don't think should be tagged canon_couple.

^[1] I suppose being made to look like a copyrighted characters would still be tagged as the copyrighted character for attribution purposes. But generally if a given character is drawn to look like something else, it's still treated as that given character.

well, Sonic/Amy aren't in a relationship in any piece of official media as far as I'm aware, so don't tag that with canon_couple.

but, uhh... ignoring that, yeah, if characters are visibly indistinguishable from the real thing I'd say treat them as if they are; both for stuff in its own post or or at the end of a transformation sequence.

watsit said:
IMO, it would depend if they "act" like the character (or I guess, still act like their original self) or not. Characters are TWYK, not TWYS; you tag a character if the artist says it's them, rather than it looking like them^[1] (otherwise the alternate_* and *_crossgender tags would be pointless). An original/fan character transforming to look like a canon character doesn't necessarily make them the canon character, it could just be that original/fan character in the guise of someone else. A character that transforms to look like another's partner, but still acts as themselves and clearly isn't acting like their partner, I don't think should be tagged canon_couple.

^[1] I suppose being made to look like a copyrighted characters would still be tagged as the copyrighted character for attribution purposes. But generally if a given character is drawn to look like something else, it's still treated as that given character.

Seems like a good way of drawing the boundaries, though I would like a bit more clarification. If a canon character is transforming into a original/fan character, but still keeps the same behaviour, should it still be eligible to count as canon character for the purposes on canon couple?

Extreme case: Two original/fan characters, after transformation, acting like a characters from a canon couple.
Or should both the mannerisms and looks be the same for it to be used?

Though I also have concerns on using behaviour to determine if the character meets the criteria for canon couple, since it is somewhat subjective.

snpthecat said:
Seems like a good way of drawing the boundaries, though I would like a bit more clarification. If a canon character is transforming into a original/fan character, but still keeps the same behaviour, should it still be eligible to count as canon character for the purposes on canon couple?

Probably.

snpthecat said:
Extreme case: Two original/fan characters, after transformation, acting like a characters from a canon couple.
Or should both the mannerisms and looks be the same for it to be used?

Though I also have concerns on using behaviour to determine if the character meets the criteria for canon couple, since it is somewhat subjective.

Yeah, it's not terribly clear or clean, but I don't know how else to do it. canon_couple is already not TWYS, nor is it even really lore (since lore tags are dependent on the artist or owner's say-so for each image, not general series canon), so it's not really clear when it should or shouldn't apply in various edge cases (like transformation, where there's a subtle but important difference between just being made to look like another character vs actually becoming them, or something in the middle where they still hold their original identity but start taking on mannerisms of the character they look like).

watsit said:
Probably.

Yeah, it's not terribly clear or clean, but I don't know how else to do it. canon_couple is already not TWYS, nor is it even really lore (since lore tags are dependent on the artist or owner's say-so for each image, not general series canon), so it's not really clear when it should or shouldn't apply in various edge cases (like transformation, where there's a subtle but important difference between just being made to look like another character vs actually becoming them, or something in the middle where they still hold their original identity but start taking on mannerisms of the character they look like).

We could move it to the character category or the meta category, though meta is probably less preferred. There's a precedent set by fan_character so maybe changing it to character might work?

snpthecat said:
We could move it to the character category or the meta category, though meta is probably less preferred. There's a precedent set by fan_character so maybe changing it to character might work?

canon_couple isn't referring to a character, but the relationship status of two characters, so it doesn't fit in the Character category, IMO. The category it's in doesn't really matter, though, you'd have the same issue regardless; it's an edge case where the line between what character someone is is blurry, and the canonicity of a relationship with said character is unclear.