BUR #4954 has been rejected.
create implication pixiv_trainer -> original
All the pixiv trainer posts are about original characters.
Posted under Tags
BUR #4954 has been rejected.
create implication pixiv_trainer -> original
All the pixiv trainer posts are about original characters.
The original tag is for characters that don’t belong to any copyright or for original characters added to an established copyright. In this case, all trainer characters are made for the Pixiv Trainer project, so the original tag doesn’t apply. No other fan/amateur project implies original either.
On one hand, I do see the utility in the implication:
If someone wants to view or exclude OC trainers, they shouldn't need to know about every little fan project.
On the other hand, I see the logic of not including it, as well as the point about other fan projects and all the other "organized" pixiv projects not really being original. We don't tag cookie_(touhou) as Original, after all. Plus, most of those are fairly small.
However! There's also oekaki_musume, which is another pixiv project that is expressly about original characters. Nearly all images there are tagged both the project name and original.
So I can see it being an either-or situation.
JS2057 said:
I mean, personally when i'm looking up original, i'm usually trying to find art original art that doesn't copyright to anything.
Anyone who looks at original like that would have to use a search filter to remove pokemon from their search every time they use it.
original pokemon has 858 posts.
Looks like there are already hundreds of images where an original character is drawn with a Pokémon: post #4326292, post #4366577, post #4235074, post #4242314, etc.
So it seems a bit weird to have pixiv trainer without original, right? A simple "pokemon original" search is often indistinguishable from those pixiv_trainer images, like post #323866, post #1123752, etc.
Some of them have the Japanese "Pikutore" logo, but others don't.
original is for original characters, including those based on other franchises. If you only want original concepts with no other copyright you have to use original copytags:1.
I think these pokemon trainers should be tagged with original to be honest, for the same reason as Veradux.
I really don't want to get into implying random tiny fan project tags to the original tag. It just feels wrong to have this random tiny tag imply original when nothing else does.
You also get into situations where something starts off as original, then becomes popular enough to get its own copyright tag, which means we have to go back and remove these implications later.
If you want to tag them manually, then fine, but I don't see a need for an implication. We already have things like fanmade Kemono Friends characters or fanmade Final Fantasy XIV characters that we have to manually tag as original anyway, because they don't have a separate copyright tag like these Pokemon trainers do. And the only reason we have the Pixiv Trainer tag because we happened to create a Danbooru tag for ぴくトレ but not for オリジナルフレンズ.
The fictional persona tag was meant for OC characters in video games, but it is extremely underutilized. All OC trainers, player-created MMO characters, etc should have it, but it would require an incredibly large amount of gardening.
evazion said:
If you want to tag them manually, then fine, but I don't see a need for an implication.
Ok, makes sense. I can manually add original to all pixiv_trainer posts.
thelieutenant said:
The fictional persona tag was meant for OC characters in video games, but it is extremely underutilized. All OC trainers, player-created MMO characters, etc should have it, but it would require an incredibly large amount of gardening.
it would also be flooded with admiral pictures lol.
The wikis of artist self-insert and fictional persona could use a little cleaning up to clarify the difference. I wouldn't understand it very well had I stumbled on the tag randomly.
I think "fictional persona" as currently described in the wiki is a weird thing to tag.
Some people self-insert into game protagonists they make in character creators. Some artists self-insert into characters they design for fun. Unless they state explicitly that they are doing that, it's kind of a steep assumption to say "representing oneself" is the purpose of, say, an arbitrary Pixiv trainer. Many artists treat their original characters more like children than reflections of themselves, and some may not anthropomorphize them at all.
The tag's also really rather useless, were we to leave the definition as-is but try not to make that assumption. Imagine a hypothetical Pokemon or MMO OC with the commentary "it's me!" and, in an alternate universe, the commentary "it's my OC!" instead. Do we really need a tag that serves to distinguish the two? (Well, the former might also get tagged artist_self-insert. I think the current fictional_persona is just a subset.)
Anyway, I think the tag name is fine, but the wiki should say something like "An artist's original character designed with the aid of a character generator or game character creator, and/or who exists in a setting not of the artist's own creation." instead, making no assumptions about why the artist created the character.
7HS said:
Anyway, I think the tag name is fine, but the wiki should say something like "An artist's original character designed with the aid of a character generator or game character creator, and/or who exists in a setting not of the artist's own creation." instead, making no assumptions about why the artist created the character.
What about the extremely common practice of drawing other peoples' in-game characters? A lot of people commission pictures of their in-game character. I tagged a whole lotta them as Original when I looked at Mabinogi, as I did not know that tag existed. I even asked before doing so and got ok'd by a few people way back...
Remove the "artist's" in that first line?
Good point. To reword things a bit, perhaps:
An original character who exists in a setting not of the character designer's own creation.
Commonly, fictional personae begin as customizable characters in MMORPGs or other video games. They may or may not have appearances which are actually possible to replicate in the associated games.
See also:
- artist self-insert
- self-portrait
- shindan maker (not all characters inspired by shindan makers are fictional personae)
I realized that it's necessary to be more firm about the character existing in a setting because I don't think this tag should be applicable to things like "Draw yourself as a high school girl" shindan makers. (It might apply to "Draw yourself as a Pokemon trainer" shindan makers, though.)
7HS said:
Good point. To reword things a bit, perhaps:
I realized that it's necessary to be more firm about the character existing in a setting because I don't think this tag should be applicable to things like "Draw yourself as a high school girl" shindan makers. (It might apply to "Draw yourself as a Pokemon trainer" shindan makers, though.)
How else would you tag them if not original? Having a setting requirement would mean that we cannot tag random one-off characters as original. That's possibly hundreds of thousands of posts. Or even something as simple as chartags:0 original simple_background.
nonamethanks said:
How else would you tag them if not original? Having a setting requirement would mean that we cannot tag random one-off characters as original. That's possibly hundreds of thousands of posts. Or even something as simple as chartags:0 original simple_background.
I'm discussing revising the wiki of the fictional persona tag, not the original tag. Sorry if that was not clear.
Random one-off characters without associated copyrights should definitely be tagged original, as they currently are.
I am indecisive about whether fictional personae should be tagged original. I would probably lean towards doing it personally, but if the consensus leans the other way I wouldn't object.
I am against implying any other tags to original for the reasons evazion stated.
The bulk update request #4954 (forum #182367) has been rejected by @evazion.