Arknights skin implications?

I spent a fair amount of time writing up a BUR to imply Arknights skins to their main tags, however I can't submit the BUR because none of the skins have wiki pages.

I thought it was something of a standard among gachas but as it turns out from discussing it on the Discord, it's mostly just Fate that implies skins/alt forms to the main tag - Genshin Impact's skins aren't implied to their main tags, nor Azur Lane, nor Girls' Frontline (from what I can see); even though the skin posts are usually tagged with the main chartag as well.

So, before I spend any more time on this (ie. create a wiki page for every single tag @_@) is this actually something that we want or not?

I think those tags should imply their main tag. Someone searching for amiya_(arknights) would also want to see images of her skin. The only problem is, that I don't know if all those skin tags would maybe flood the main tag to much?
But then again, I think searching for her and adding "-official_alternate_costume" should be enough, if you want the main outfit.

Guaro said:

I think those tags should imply their main tag. Someone searching for amiya_(arknights) would also want to see images of her skin. The only problem is, that I don't know if all those skin tags would maybe flood the main tag to much?
But then again, I think searching for her and adding "-official_alternate_costume" should be enough, if you want the main outfit.

Right now it seems that most of the skin/alt forms posts ARE already tagged with the main tag, but the tags aren't implied so everyone does it manually I guess.

They're already all tagged with the base costume, and afaik that's how we do it for other copyrights as well. If we're going to imply all these an additional implication to official_alternate_costume might help since some people forget to tag that. Then searching for a char and excluding that should be fine.

Talulah said:

They're already all tagged with the base costume, and afaik that's how we do it for other copyrights as well. If we're going to imply all these an additional implication to official_alternate_costume might help since some people forget to tag that. Then searching for a char and excluding that should be fine.

We don't do cross category implications anymore, so that's a no go. Official alternate costume will need to be added manually.

For reasons I've never actually seen provided, we don't imply skins to their base tags. Whenever it comes up, all that's said on the matter is "we don't do that" and then the idea is dropped. Since no one's ever given a proper reason for this, and everyone already tags the base character anyway, I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever not to have these implications.

blindVigil said:

For reasons I've never actually seen provided, we don't imply skins to their base tags. Whenever it comes up, all that's said on the matter is "we don't do that" and then the idea is dropped. Since no one's ever given a proper reason for this, and everyone already tags the base character anyway, I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever not to have these implications.

The only thing I had personally heard is that, though a skin is typically associated with that given character, artists could draw another wearing that skin. So, a post like that could just have the skin tag by itself, with borrowed garments being paired with it. I even think there's skin tags which have their own cosplay tags associated with them, as a result of this approach.

blindVigil said:

For reasons I've never actually seen provided, we don't imply skins to their base tags. Whenever it comes up, all that's said on the matter is "we don't do that" and then the idea is dropped. Since no one's ever given a proper reason for this, and everyone already tags the base character anyway, I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever not to have these implications.

This only really applies to fate, because there's so many skins that having them imply their bazillion different alternate costumes means you won't be able to easily find the original one without excluding seven different tags. I see no issue in implicating an alternate costume to the main tag if there's only one.

nonamethanks said:

This only really applies to fate, because there's so many skins that having them imply their bazillion different alternate costumes means you won't be able to easily find the original one without excluding seven different tags. I see no issue in implicating an alternate costume to the main tag if there's only one.

Lots of Azur Lane/Arknights/GFL characters have several costumes, but official alternate costume solves that issue perfectly, if people remember to add it. This could be applied to Fate in some places as well, but so many of its character tags are entirely separate people and not just a costume change, so it probably wouldn't help a huge amount.

blindVigil said:

We don't do cross category implications anymore, so that's a no go. Official alternate costume will need to be added manually.

Right, I forgot about this.

Arknights has been picking up the alter crap too so I guess it's probably relevant to discuss whether alters should be counted as alternate costumes for the sake of tagging. I would say yes, because even if they're technically separate player characters, they're still the same character and look the same. I don't play Fate, so I don't know if this applies there too, though.

These skin tags get de facto tagged alongside with the base tag, so an implication is the logical step.

Fate, when it comes to tagging, should never, ever be the reference. This franchise is its own can of worms that needs to be treated seperately.

Talulah said:

Right, I forgot about this.

Arknights has been picking up the alter crap too so I guess it's probably relevant to discuss whether alters should be counted as alternate costumes for the sake of tagging. I would say yes, because even if they're technically separate player characters, they're still the same character and look the same. I don't play Fate, so I don't know if this applies there too, though.

Alters should definitely imply the base character yeah, they also do in Fate (though we had that whole _(all) tag mess for a while due to the sheer amounts of skins/variations.)
Something like Lava The Purgatory should definitely show up when looking up Lava so I see no reason to not have an implication.

Astolfo said:

Alters should definitely imply the base character yeah, they also do in Fate (though we had that whole _(all) tag mess for a while due to the sheer amounts of skins/variations.)
Something like Lava The Purgatory should definitely show up when looking up Lava so I see no reason to not have an implication.

The question was whether or not characters like Lava the Purgatory, Skadi the Corrupting Heart, and Ch'en the Holungday should be treated as official alternate costumes, so that they can be excluded from searches. At least as far as I know, none of them are separate people in the lore, so I don't see any reason they shouldn't be.

BUR #6682 has been approved by @evazion.

As discussed in the thread, I've populated the wikis. (Barebone explanation, granted, but do you need more for a gacha skin..?)

BUR #6683 has been approved by @evazion.

Part 2 because it was over 100 lines. These are all <10 posts tags.

The status quo is that we don't imply skin tags to base tags, instead we add the base tag manually. This is mainly because we didn't do it for League of Legends and Overwatch, where skin tagging originated. We didn't do it there because it would require hundreds of implications, which no one has bothered with because most people don't forget to tag the base character manually. It's similar to why we don't imply character tags to copyright tags - it's high effort low reward.

If we do this we're going to have to do it for at least Azur Lane, League of Legends, Overwatch, and probably others.

Astolfo said:

I spent a fair amount of time writing up a BUR to imply Arknights skins to their main tags, however I can't submit the BUR because none of the skins have wiki pages.

This is intentional exactly to discourage these kinds of situations where people want to add a million implications without defining what any of the tags are for, or without doing research into how we handle similar tags. It's a barrier to entry to discourage low-effort requests.

For skin tags, we want at least their Pixiv tags, and for each character to have a list of their skins in their wiki.

evazion said:

We didn't do it there because it would require hundreds of implications, which no one has bothered with because most people don't forget to tag the base character manually. It's similar to why we don't imply character tags to copyright tags - it's high effort low reward.

That isn't always true unfortunately, and I've seen at various times the base character be untagged and only the skin be tagged.
Well, from what I recall that was the case mostly amidst some Fate variants, specifically the ones that don't have implications (while most of the others do), eg a astolfo_(saber)_(fate) -astolfo_(fate) search would return some amount of art with exclusively the saber tag.
It's just that if this is something that is done all the time regardless, then it seemed odd to continue doing it manually when that's what implications are for.

If we do this we're going to have to do it for at least Azur Lane, League of Legends, Overwatch, and probably others.

I know next to nothing about most franchises that do skin tagging other than Genshin Impact and Arknights, personally. And well Fate (Series) but that already has the implications in most cases. So I mostly worked on it for a franchise that I actually know about; admittedly, I had also thought that those other franchises DID have implications and Arknights was the outlier in not having them, but turns out Fate is the outlier (as usual) and most franchises with costume skins don't imply the base tag, even though they systematically get tagged together.

For skin tags, we want at least their Pixiv tags, and for each character to have a list of their skins in their wiki.

From what I saw most (if not all) of the costumes for Arknights go untagged on Pixiv, or if they do have a tag it's so underused it might as well not exist; they just tag the base character (and maybe sometimes some blurb like "swimsuit nearl" which isn't even necessarily the costume because it could just be Nearl in a non-official-costume swimsuit)

evazion said:

The status quo is that we don't imply skin tags to base tags, instead we add the base tag manually. This is mainly because we didn't do it for League of Legends and Overwatch, where skin tagging originated. We didn't do it there because it would require hundreds of implications, which no one has bothered with because most people don't forget to tag the base character manually. It's similar to why we don't imply character tags to copyright tags - it's high effort low reward.

If we do this we're going to have to do it for at least Azur Lane, League of Legends, Overwatch, and probably others.

This is intentional exactly to discourage these kinds of situations where people want to add a million implications without defining what any of the tags are for, or without doing research into how we handle similar tags. It's a barrier to entry to discourage low-effort requests.

For skin tags, we want at least their Pixiv tags, and for each character to have a list of their skins in their wiki.

There's no drawback in approving this.
How about removing the implication from large breasts to breasts? Breasts will get added anyways. That's a non-argument.

You're describing a situation that was the status quo back in the late 10s, around 2017 to 2019 and also 2020. But I think the mentality around these tags changed quite a bit since then.

I'm not against doing it. I'm explaining why we didn't do it before.

Doing this for one copyright means people will expect these implications to exist for other copyrights too. People may stop adding base character tags if they expect them to be automatically added by the skin tag. That's the other reason for not doing character -> copyright implications; it can ironically lead to an increase in mistagging if we don't do it for every single copyright. So we'll really need people to make BURs for every copyright with skin tags too, and not forget to request new implications as new skins come out.

The bulk update request #6682 (forum #193967) has been approved by @evazion.

The bulk update request #6683 (forum #193968) has been approved by @evazion.