[author]_(style) tags

These tags are used prominently for parody if not for a minor occurrence of users tagging straight fan art with it, in contrast with the [decade]_(style) tags which are employed at face value to tag both homage fan art and originally licensed illustrations. As alphes_(style) already implies style_parody should we proceed the same way with the rest?

I can make a few nitpicks about utilizing them exclusively for parody:

• It has caveats at the moment of getting to know the tag: 'author' does not draw in 'author_(style)', fan art of 'author' is not drawn in 'author_(style)'
• An artist may use author's author_(style) without comical intent to draw something original

None of them are critical though, as we already have official_style and I have a hard time picturing the second case.

BUR #4831 has been rejected.

create implication matt_groening_(style) -> style_parody
create implication fukumoto_nobuyuki_(style) -> style_parody
create implication araki_hirohiko_(style) -> style_parody
create implication bkub_(style) -> style_parody
create implication fujiko_f_fujio_(style) -> style_parody
create implication ishikei_(style) -> style_parody
create implication zun_(style) -> style_parody
create implication riyo_(lyomsnpmp)_(style) -> style_parody

alphes_(style) implicates style_parody

A quick search of *_(style) shows that there are hundreds of tags.
I think at this point it would be better to make an automated system similar to *_(cosplay) tags, otherwise a new implication should be made everytime a new artist tag pops out.

Well, to be honest, we should stop hardcoding in automated implications. I'd much rather prefer having the ability to create regex or wildcard implications that can be voted on and approved, plus it would give full insight into that aspect rather than being hidden away in the code and documented absolutely nowhere.

BrokenEagle98 said:

Well, to be honest, we should stop hardcoding in automated implications. I'd much rather prefer having the ability to create regex or wildcard implications that can be voted on and approved, plus it would give full insight into that aspect rather than being hidden away in the code and documented absolutely nowhere.

_(style) tags are already automatically moved and treated like _(cosplay) for the purpose of tag counts, so really autotagging their parent tag is the only thing they lack compared to cosplays.

My only doubt is that these tags are not necessarily used as parody. They're often tributes or similar, especially in case of mainstream artists, so IDK if we want to pull the parody tag with them.

For many riyo (lyomsnpmp) (style) posts, the post itself isn't a parody of Riyo's style, rather it's just a Riyo chibi somewhere in the image. It feels wrong to me to call something like post #3295109 a style parody of Riyo when the post itself isn't in his style, it's just a Riyo chibi thrown in as an easter egg, which makes up a tiny part of the image.

Username_Hidden said:

A quick search of *_(style) shows that there are hundreds of tags.
I think at this point it would be better to make an automated system similar to *_(cosplay) tags, otherwise a new implication should be made everytime a new artist tag pops out.

This doesn't work because *_(style) includes 1990s (style), which isn't an artist style parody, it's a time period style parody, aka retro artstyle, which is considered separate from style parody.

The is the problem with wildcard implications, there are very few cases where they don't lead to unexpected consequences.

evazion said:

This doesn't work because *_(style) includes 1990s (style), which isn't an artist style parody, it's a time period style parody, aka retro artstyle, which is considered separate from style parody.

The is the problem with wildcard implications, there are very few cases where they don't lead to unexpected consequences.

Would it be possible to change tags like 1990_(style) to something else, like 1990_style to differentiate them from *_(style) artist tags, or maybe use *_(style) for periods and *_(artstyle) for artist styles?

Bump.

Since we have retro artstyle, we could try to move all year_(style) to year_(artstyle) for language consistency with retro artstyle since artist_(style) has known artist name while *_(artstyle) refers to the period artists draw in that particular style (who first envisioned that style during the period is still not known until now, unless the Community has watched an anime which popped out exactly at January 1, 1990 for 1990s (style))

I generally don't agree with the BUR mostly due to the second point OP puts up. I do believe the _(style) tag has two uses, one for parody and one for tribute, and making it strictly a style parody is kind of a mockery of what some tribute artists tried to do. Also, like evazion put up, there are taggers here that apply the _(style) tags to images where only a tiny part of the image was drawn in a certain artist's style, which makes the use of style parody tag rather confusing to those who aren't really looking.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

The bulk update request #4831 (forum #181519) has been rejected by @ljhkhjkghjybtvhyt.