Duplicate calico tag

Damian0358 said:

No, I'm fully aware of that, but as I noted earlier, animal subtype tags being used for animal girls, etc. is consistent with other tags on-site if they don't have a dedicated tag of their own (so you won't see tiger being used for animal girls because of tiger girl, but you don't have 'calico cat girl' or 'shiba inu girl', so you use the subtype tag itself). If they have an issue with that aspect of the tag, then you'd have to change many, many more tags in the process.

Unlike those other tags you mentioned, calico is not just an animal subtype, it's a distinct color pattern that can be present on other animals besides cats. Also, to insist that everybody who has ever used calico for calico-patterned things other than cats is mistagging when the tag name never specified that it's for cats, the wiki only got made much later on and there weren't any better ways to tag the concept of "calico pattern present in picture" is ridiculous.

やっかいな人でごめん said:

Unlike those other tags you mentioned, calico is not just an animal subtype, it's a distinct color pattern that can be present on other animals besides cats. Also, to insist that everybody who has ever used calico for calico-patterned things other than cats is mistagging when the tag name never specified that it's for cats, the wiki only got made much later on and there weren't any better ways to tag the concept of "calico pattern present in picture" is ridiculous.

A tag can be ambiguous in its name (as calico is), and also be mistaggable (as it's very clear calico is intended for the cats with that pattern and adjacent, and even with a wiki, a lot of folks do not read wikis). These aren't mutually exclusive things, and has happened with many tags before; which is why you do a BUR to change their name to be more specific.

The fact that there weren't better ways of tagging calico patterns in pictures is a failure on the part of taggers on-site, to have allowed this situation to persist even after Aqros added the extra clause to the wiki two years ago. The earlier-mentioned calico print has only been around since December, has no wiki, isn't linked anywhere, and is very obviously undertagged. But given everything mentioned earlier, transferring everything from calico to calico cat would cause little issue in so far as how tags like it are handled, and would just need the few mistags on the post to a new tag for non-cat calico patterned stuff.

Damian0358 said:

A tag can be ambiguous in its name (as calico is), and also be mistaggable (as it's very clear calico is intended for the cats with that pattern and adjacent, and even with a wiki, a lot of folks do not read wikis). These aren't mutually exclusive things, and has happened with many tags before; which is why you do a BUR to change their name to be more specific.

The fact that there weren't better ways of tagging calico patterns in pictures is a failure on the part of taggers on-site, to have allowed this situation to persist even after Aqros added the extra clause to the wiki two years ago. The earlier-mentioned calico print has only been around since December, has no wiki, isn't linked anywhere, and is very obviously undertagged. But given everything mentioned earlier, transferring everything from calico to calico cat would cause little issue in so far as how tags like it are handled, and would just need the few mistags on the post to a new tag for non-cat calico patterned stuff.

And you somehow still conveniently ignore the whole part where other animals can also be calico-colored, not just cats.

やっかいな人でごめん said:

And you somehow still conveniently ignore the whole part where other animals can also be calico-colored, not just cats.

I literally pointed out on the previous page that one of the mistags was on a calico-patterned dog, on post #603063; that doesn't change what the tag was used for, for the vast, vast majority of posts, which was for calico-patterned cats and adjacent.

Tagging a dog that is clearly colored calico with "calico" is a mistag, even though there is no "cat" anywhere in the calico tag name itself, and there is no clause that calico should be exclusively used for cats. Sure, whatever.

BUR #27486 has been rejected.

deprecate calico

Regardless of how the tag was intended to be used, the fact that we can't tag calico-patterned things other than cats with calico is a problem. If we really want a tag specifically for calico-patterned cats, then it makes sense for them to be tagged with calico cat. Either way, we would need to split the tag further to cover other posts (calico fur, calico pattern, and the aforementioned calico print).

If we split the tag like this, it would be better to deprecate calico instead of aliasing it because it would then be too ambiguous to be tied to any one of the above tags. The only other feasible option I can think of is to just use calico for any calico pattern.

BUR #27488 has been rejected.

mass update favgroup:33120 -> calico_print -calico
create alias calico -> calico_cat
remove alias calico -> calico_cat
deprecate calico

99% of what's there should be tagged calico cat so I don't see why we don't just do this and then manually garden the few remaining posts in calico -cat -cat_girl -cat_boy -furry -favgroup:33120.

gfz said:

BUR #27488 has been rejected.

mass update favgroup:33120 -> calico_print -calico
create alias calico -> calico_cat
remove alias calico -> calico_cat
deprecate calico

99% of what's there should be tagged calico cat so I don't see why we don't just do this and then manually garden the few remaining posts in calico -cat -cat_girl -cat_boy -furry -favgroup:33120.

Most of the posts under calico -cat should not be tagged with calico cat because they are cat girls, not actual cats. Otherwise, we'd need to start tagging cat girls with white and black fur with white cat and black cat respectively.

It's been my observation that the current convention for animal species (not colors) is that they are tagged alongside chimeras, furries, humanizations, and so on of that species.
For example:
husky -dog
cobra -snake
koi mermaid

You may disagree with this, but I think that discussion would be deserving of a separate forum thread. In this case, I don't think we should make an exception for calico cat.

gfz said:

It's been my observation that the current convention for animal species (not colors) is that they are tagged alongside chimeras, furries, humanizations, and so on of that species.

Yes, for species. Calico is a pattern of colors, not a species or even a specific cat breed.

Wikipedia said:

Derived from a colorful printed Calico fabric, when the term "calico" is applied to cats, it refers only to a color pattern of the fur, not to a cat breed or any reference to any other traits, such as their eyes.

Robinson, Richard. "Mosaicism". Genetics. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2003. 76-80.

BUR #27502 has been rejected.

create alias calico -> calico_pattern

I don't think that calico cats/catpeople and calico print should be separate tags.

Blank_User said:

Yes, for species. Calico is a pattern of colors, not a species or even a specific cat breed.

Sorry, I shouldn't have used the word species, that's my bad. It's true that calico is not a species, but neither are the other examples I used. Huskies, Cobras, and Koi are also not species, they're just common names for groups of species or animals with similar traits/behaviors/appearances. Tabby cat is another example, it's just a coat pattern but it doesn't get broken out into tabby pattern or something.

Aqros161 said:

I don't think that calico cats/catpeople and calico print should be separate tags.

Why not? We have a whole set of tags specifically for clothing resembling animals, animal print.

gfz said:

Sorry, I shouldn't have used the word species, that's my bad. It's true that calico is not a species, but neither are the other examples I used. Huskies, Cobras, and Koi are also not species, they're just common names for groups of species or animals with similar traits/behaviors/appearances. Tabby cat is another example, it's just a coat pattern but it doesn't get broken out into tabby pattern or something.

Your examples are still specific to the species, including tabby cat. Calico can appear on other animals besides cats. Huskies, cobras, and koi have distinctive features other than color that can make them identifiable in anthropometric form. The tabby cat pattern doesn't, but it seems to be specific to cats, unlike the calico pattern. To me, it seems like an exception is being made for calico as a color/pattern tag rather than it being a legitimate example of a "species" or "sub-breed" tag.

Also, no one's mentioned this yet, but there was a similar discussion about this in topic #14487.

Someone on the danbooru diacord suggested making calico_dog, and I don't see why not. Though I can find only two examples of post #6281999 and post #603063.

Every other image in the tag is in relation to the cats or cat girls, even the "hamster" posted earlier is actually just a fat cat.

Print tags can be used for mugs, which takes care of post #4914560

I dont see what the issue is calico -calico_print -*cat* -goutokuji_mike has no results besides that mug image, this seems like a super easy tag to cleanly split. Just make calico_dog and any other theoretical calico animals.

The pictures under calico and calico cat should be merged under a single tag (be it called calico, calico cat, or both). (Without the mug, and the hamster (I think it is a hamster, not a cat.))

I wonder if calico cat girl and calico cat boy should be their own tags.

Also I think calico_print should exclude animals and real animal people. I am not sure if it should exclude fake animal parts, fake ears, tails and clothes.

reg_panda said:

The pictures under calico and calico cat should be merged under a single tag (be it called calico, calico cat, or both). (Without the mug, and the hamster (I think it is a hamster, not a cat.))

I haven't seen any hamster with ears that pointy and a tail that big, but I have seen plenty of cartoon fat cats that look similar.

reg_panda said:
I wonder if calico cat girl and calico cat boy should be their own tags.

I don't see why calico cat should get a cat boy/girl equivalent when we don't have them for black cat or white cat. Even if we treated calico as a species or breed (which I argued against), we typically try to avoid creating separate tags for those kind of characters. They would be tagged with the relevant species/breed tag instead.

reg_panda said:
Also I think calico_print should exclude animals and real animal people. I am not sure if it should exclude fake animal parts, fake ears, tails and clothes.

That's why I suggested using calico pattern. Unlike calico print, its name does not suggest it would be limited to inorganic material.

Calico print should definitely not exclude clothes. That's probably the most likely thing it would be used on.

BUR #27597 has been rejected.

remove implication black_cat -> cat
remove implication white_cat -> cat

Blank_User said:

I don't see why calico cat should get a cat boy/girl equivalent when we don't have them for black cat or white cat.

If you look at the forums for basically any type of animal you will see this exact same argument being made dozens of times.
topic #24377
topic #22622
forum #211724
topic #14487

black cat and white cat are the exceptions, not the rule. But if the inconsistency bothers you we can do this to resolve it (which will also help the mistags of black cat and white cat furries like post #3624687)

gfz said:

BUR #27597 has been rejected.

remove implication black_cat -> cat
remove implication white_cat -> cat

...we can do this to resolve it (which will also help the mistags of black cat and white cat furries like post #3624687)

Even if they weren't furries, that post would be a different kind of mistag, as the "black" cat is only black on its head. Regardless, we shouldn't be removing implications because they add an extra mistag when used incorrectly. That's just the nature of implications - imagine removing the black_pantyhose -> pantyhose implication because it makes it easier to clean up when a user mistakenly uses it for leggings.

gfz said:

BUR #27597 has been rejected.

remove implication black_cat -> cat
remove implication white_cat -> cat

If you look at the forums for basically any type of animal you will see this exact same argument being made dozens of times.
topic #24377
topic #22622
forum #211724
topic #14487

black cat and white cat are the exceptions, not the rule. But if the inconsistency bothers you we can do this to resolve it (which will also help the mistags of black cat and white cat furries like post #3624687)

Read reg panda's post and my response again. They were proposing we create calico cat boy and calico cat girl tags. My response was that we don't typically create such tags for color variations or other subtypes. Furthermore, creating tags such as black cat boy would be largely redundant with tags such as black fur, black tail, and so on. And adding black cat to humanoid characters will just make it harder to search for actual black cats since body fur and the color variants. The implications you brought up are unrelated to my argument (not to mention I already brought up topic #14487 only a few posts ago). The focus of my argument for that specific statement was based from the discussion in topic #25676.

We should bring this discussion back to the calico pattern. I'll be repeating myself a bit, but I want to make sure my proposal is properly understood. To summarize my current position;

• Calico should be treated as a fur color, not a species or breed like serval or husky.
• Calico should be depreciated.
• Calico should be split into calico fur, calico print, and as many calico "animal" tags as needed (at least the ones with a large number of fur color variations such as cats).
• Calico fur should be used with furries or humans with animal features such as cat boys and cat girls. It should be used for both real and fake animal parts when applicable because there's no consistently easy way to tell them apart.
• Calico print should be used with clothing, materials, and other inanimate objects.
• The animal tags would only be used for actual animals. For example, calico cat should only be for actual cats that have a calico pattern.

You may notice I'm abandoning the idea of calico pattern as an umbrella tag. I think if we split the tag between animate and inanimate objects, an umbrella tag won't be necessary. This is partly because most things that aren't body fur will be an inanimate object of some kind.

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