Topic: Tag Implication: seviper -> pokémon

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

A human wearing a Seviper costume even qualifies, since it's representative of Pokemon. This implication should go through. o.O

Updated by anonymous

Lizardite said:
If this is wrong, then there are four pages of incorrect tag implications: https://e621.net/tag_implication?implied_to=pok%C3%A9mon

Rainbow_Dash said:
Some of those are going to need to be deleted then

Are you going to remove implications from fim characters too? They can be humanized and all other thing can be done to them as well. Same goes for all other franchises.

Updated by anonymous

I think this should go through. Even if a pokémon weren't always a pokémon, pokémon is a copyright tag on this site. For everything related to the franchise, not necessarily only the pokémons themselves.

Updated by anonymous

Lizardite said:
How can be a Pokémon not always a Pokémon? Even if drawn as an anthro or as an hybrid it would be still a Pokémon

Yeah, I don't see the problem either.
Well... except for the hybrids, maybe. Since those tend to fall under Fakemon instead.

Updated by anonymous

Wyvrn said:
I think this should go through. Even if a pokémon weren't always a pokémon, pokémon is a copyright tag on this site. For everything related to the franchise, not necessarily only the pokémons themselves.

This. this is what I'm saying.

It's not a species tag, it's a Copyright tag. I don't see why this was confused?

Updated by anonymous

Ah yes, let's treat it like a copyright tag to be applied and not a literal species tag and we should be fine

Updated by anonymous

ippiki_ookami said:
isnt that what we've been doing?

Yeah, sorry, got confused by pokemon being a species tag and for some reason thought that extended to the pokemon tag being a species as well

Updated by anonymous

  • 1