Is there a reason why we don't do this? Next to all non-original characters always come with a certain copyright, and more than half of the posts would have their copyrights automatically filled correctly that way
Updated by Hillside Moose
Posted under Tags
This topic has been locked.
Is there a reason why we don't do this? Next to all non-original characters always come with a certain copyright, and more than half of the posts would have their copyrights automatically filled correctly that way
Updated by Hillside Moose
There are simply far too many character tags. There are 70780 character tags and we'd need to create an implication for every one. Compare to the current number of implications we have: 3780 implications. We'd be increasing the number of implications by almost 20x. It doesn't seem worth the admin's time to manually approve each and every one. It also wouldn't surprise me if this had a negative impact on site performance in one way or another.
And the benefit of character -> copyright implications seems minimal, since the majority of taggers already add copyright tags where appropriate. The search chartags:1.. copytags:0 only has 297 posts. The total number of posts on the site with at least 1 character tag is around 1,400,000, and 297 posts out of that is very tiny.
Toks said:
The search chartags:1.. copytags:0 only has 297 posts. The total number of posts on the site with at least 1 character tag is around 1,400,000, and 297 posts out of that is very tiny.
A chunk of these have no copyright because I couldn't determine/decide on one that made sense, not that nobody tagged it.
This has been suggested many times already and rejected in each so far, e.g. topic #312.
Borrator said:
Is there a reason why we don't do this? Next to all non-original characters always come with a certain copyright, and more than half of the posts would have their copyrights automatically filled correctly that way
Besides the mass number of tags, I can think of cases where such a policy would lead to hassle down the road when we'd have to remove the implication. For example the character Cocona Vatel from Ar Tonelico II, under the policy we would have her implicate the Ar Tonelico II tag, but later on with Ar Tonelico III she was a returning character, but had grown up between the two titles so had a different appearance. In this situation having her implicate the one specific game she is initially from results in noise for images of her from the later game until the implication is removed so that her more grown up version is only getting the appropriate tag.
To continue with that example, the alternative to having her implicate the specific copyright (Ar Tonelico II or III) would be to have the character implicate the franchise tag (Ar Tonelico), which may sound like a good proposal, but the actual results of that would be no real benefit to the user. Specific copyright tags under a franchise tag are already normally made to implicate the franchise tag that they're under, so having both the character and the specific copyright implicate the franchise would result in only redundancy. So this does not remove the fact that the user would still need to manually input the specific copyright tag to the image alongside the character tag, so it would not succeed in making things easier for some of (if not many) character tags.
Lastly, which may be pessimism on part, but I'd worry such implications would result in some users becoming lazier with tagging. For example lets assume that we went ahead with the policy and with things like Cocona Vatel we had them just implicate the franchise tag, I'd worry that there would be users who would stop bothering to tag the specific game that the character is from because with the implication a copyright gets assigned and they would view that as "good enough".
Guess to sum up my concerns: (1) I think it could create messier complications and more effort to clean up (which only an admin could resolve btw), and (2) I worry it may have a negative effects on the tagging practices of some (always be users who do the bare minimum of tagging though).
I've added a mention of this topic to help:tag_implications, as a side note. (I created both that page and help:tag_aliases just a few days ago, so if there's anything missing or incorrect it's my fault.)