An image containing a single instance of a single character. No one else should be visible in the image.
"A single instance" means only one copy of the character. These situations should not be tagged solo:
Single characters being depicted from multiple views (post #12904)
dakimakura which contain multiple views
Can someone explain the reasoning for this to me? How is something like post #4750933 not solo? How does there being multiple views change the fact there's only a single character in that post? I don't see why someone searching solo wouldn't want something like that included. It just seems to gimp solo searches for no reason.
I agree with you tbh, for as long as I've been on this site it's always felt dumb to me to not be able to tag multiple views with solo when there's just a single character in the picture.
1girl/boy/other counts characters and solo counts bodies. (forum #129161)
That doesn't explain why that's the better way to use the tag. The thread evazion links doesn't give a single reason why the tag should be used that way, just two or three people of the opinion that that's how it should be used, with no reasoning given why. NWF Renim even specifically says near the end of the thread that there wasn't really a solid agreement on the matter.
Unbreakable said:
I also don't think ruining a tag because people misuse it is good a solution, most of the time.
Solo has 2million posts, multiple views has 52k, it isn't like it's going to be flooded, and I don't see any other reasons the tags being inclusive would be a hindrance. The multiple views exclusion is a consistent tagging problem, it doesn't seem like the tag is fairing well as it is.
That doesn't explain why that's the better way to use the tag.
Then what would? Because I think it does explain why.
blindVigil said:
Solo has 2million posts, multiple views has 52k, it isn't like it's going to be flooded, and I don't see any other reasons the tags being inclusive would be a hindrance. The multiple views exclusion is a consistent tagging problem, it doesn't seem like the tag is fairing well as it is.
Because then you can't search for a single instance of a single character. And before you say that solo -multiple_views will give you that, remember that comics with a single character in multiple panels aren't tagged multiple_views.
I don't have a strong opinion either way, and I know we don't use it for multiple views, though I can't say I remember the reasoning either. I also found it a bit odd. Weirder still is when we have say 1girl on dual persona or multiple persona where you could argue the personae are actually different characters (or at least versions of that character) in the same scene.
"Fixing" it if that's what we chose to do would be rough though because solo is a huge tag.
Because then you can't search for a single instance of a single character. And before you say that solo -multiple_views will give you that, remember that comics with a single character in multiple panels aren't tagged multiple_views.
They're also not exempt from solo, going by the wiki. Solo comic already returns 10k posts, plenty of which feature a single character in multiple panels.
They're also not exempt from solo, going by the wiki. Solo comic already returns 10k posts, plenty of which feature a single character in multiple panels.
Why would they be? It's not a single copy of a single character.
I see the concept of Solo and multiple views as two different things, even if I can understand how absurd it is that you can't really search for stuff like post #4750933, only if you search multiple_views 1girl -multiple_boys -1boy -1other -multiple_others and that's stupid. I think solo should stay like it is, but I would be in favor of having a tag for stuff like post #4750933, something like solo views or another name, which would be for mulitple view images with only one character.
I see the concept of Solo and multiple views as two different things, even if I can understand how absurd it is that you can't really search for stuff like post #4750933, only if you search multiple_views 1girl -multiple_boys -1boy -1other -multiple_others and that's stupid. I think solo should stay like it is, but I would be in favor of having a tag for stuff like post #4750933, something like solo views or another name, which would be for mulitple view images with only one character.
With that search you effectively did only cut down 5k images, compared to a multiple views 1girl search. That's pretty negligible, don't you think?
I think solo should stay like it is, but I would be in favor of having a tag for stuff like post #4750933, something like solo views or another name, which would be for mulitple view images with only one character.
Two or more different pictures of the same character in an image. These can be the same character from different viewpoints, in different outfits, in different poses, or any combination
I think soloshould be changed, because the current definition is an unintuitive Danbooru creation. No dictionary defines "solo" as a "a single instance of a person," it just means "one person." No one reads wikis, and I don't think they should have to to figure out that a tag is used in a way counter to its real world definition.
Solo is being used as an antonym of multiple views, when the two concepts couldn't have less to do with eachother. Noneofthesethings are things I would expect or want to be excluded from a solo search. "A single instance of a character" should just be its own tag, if it's a needed concept.
Including multiple views in solo wouldn't make finding nice pin-ups a pain in the ass or anything; due to the overwhelming amount of solo posts compared to multiple views, I wouldn't even have to change searches to solo -multiple_views. So at least that's logical and not very problematic.
However, from a tagging perspective, the name would feel less intuitive and natural. My intuition has always been that solo means alone (which follows the dictionary definition). I'd probably never tag solo on a multiple views post unless it were renamed to one character or something, which is even less intuitive. But it's weird because it feels like it could work the other way: "alone" seems to be an appropriate solo rename for a multiple views post, but not solo. Wouldn't really help with the ambiguity, though, so one character would be better even if verbose.
Nonetheless, post #4750933 mentioned in the OP is a good counterexample. Although the character is technically alone, they very much would not be alone of there were three clones of their full body in the image, even if it's just multiple views or expressions. So it's probably better to treat all extra views of the character the same way.
chartags:1 is somewhat reliable for finding these "one character" posts, though it's less effective if it's a cosplay or if unnamed characters are involved (as there is no original for character tags). While it may sound less than ideal, I'd change your solo searches to ~solo ~multiple_views chartags:1; you'll find it quite reliable especially when adding -1boy, -1girl, -1other, -pokemon, no humans, etc.
I think most people searching for solo (including myself) definitely want "alone, one view" and don't just mean "only one character, but multiple views". Tough issue, but the status quo better fits my motives when searching and seems more accurate semantically; I think that applies to most users who search solo as well, so I don't want any change.
chartags:1 is somewhat reliable for finding these "one character" posts, though it's less effective if it's a cosplay or if unnamed characters are involved (as there is no original for character tags). While it may sound less than ideal, I'd change your solo searches to ~solo ~multiple_views chartags:1; you'll find it quite reliable especially when adding -1boy, -1girl, -1other, -pokemon, no humans, etc.
Unless if it's a gacha character with extra skintags.
Or if it's a character with an alternate self that used to be considered separate characters but now imply the main.
e? said: I think most people searching for solo (including myself) definitely want "alone, one view" and don't just mean "only one character, but multiple views is]]. Tough issue, but the status quo better fits my motives when searching and seems more accurate semantically; I think that applies to most users who search solo as well, so I don't want any change.
Do they really? Seems to me like someone not familiar with the tag definition would expect character+solo to give them all images of that character by themself. They wouldn't expect a pic like post #4750933 to be excluded simply because there's an additional view of the character in the same pose. What difference does it make to them? A case could be made for pics where the character is in multiple poses (most dakimakura_(medium) pics), or doing different stuff, but making solo and multiple_views mutually exclusive under every circumstance seems hugely unintuitive to me.
