[APPROVED] [Fate] Update Tamamo tags

remove implication tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) -> caster_(fate/extra)
remove implication tamamo_no_mae_(swimsuit_lancer)_(fate) -> caster_(fate/extra)

create alias caster_(fate/extra) -> tamamo_no_mae_(fate)
create alias tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) -> tamamo_cat_(fate)

mass update caster_(fate/extra)_(cosplay) -> tamamo_no_mae_(fate)_(cosplay)
mass update tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order)_(cosplay) -> tamamo_cat_(fate)_(cosplay)
mass update amaterasu_(fate/extra) -> amaterasu_(fate)

create implication tamamo_no_mae_(fate) -> tamamo_(fate)_(all)
create implication tamamo_no_mae_(swimsuit_lancer)_(fate) -> tamamo_(fate)_(all)
create implication tamamo_cat_(fate) -> tamamo_(fate)_(all)
create implication tamamo_jk_(fate) -> tamamo_(fate)_(all)
create implication amaterasu_(fate) -> tamamo_(fate)_(all)

Link to request

Continuing the Great Fate Retagging Project from topic #13728. This time updating Tamamo, another popular character with many clones.

tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) -> tamamo_cat_(fate) and amaterasu_(fate/extra) -> amaterasu_(fate) because I don't see a point in specifying a single game when it's not a repeated name.

Not included, an alias request for tamamo_shark -> tamamo_no_mae_(swimsuit_lancer)_(fate), because that name is only given a passing mention in her profile and I don't know if enough people are going to search for it, since it's not the name used in the stat screen, and I would discuss that later.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1387 (forum #139325) has been approved by @albert.

There are strong arguments against this change and there are users opposed to it, see topic #13728.

Caster's true name is a spoiler in Fate/Extra.

Visually, tamamo_no_mae_(swimsuit_lancer)_(fate) and tamamo_jk_(fate) are the same character as caster_(fate/extra), just in different clothes. So it's not certain that we need separate character tags for them to begin with. And even if we do keep them, they should be implicated to caster_(fate/extra).

Then, catch all tag is not necessary because it can be replaced by a simple tag search: ~caster_(fate/extra) ~tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) ~amaterasu_(fate/extra).

Removing tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) implication is fine, though.

Why do we have a tag for Tamamo JK and Amaterasu? Do we really need more tags at this point?

MyrMindservant said:

There are strong arguments against this change and there are users opposed to it, see topic #13728.

Caster's true name is a spoiler in Fate/Extra.

Visually, tamamo_no_mae_(swimsuit_lancer)_(fate) and tamamo_jk_(fate) are the same character as caster_(fate/extra), just in different clothes. So it's not certain that we need separate character tags for them to begin with. And even if we do keep them, they should be implicated to caster_(fate/extra).

Then, catch all tag is not necessary because it can be replaced by a simple tag search: ~caster_(fate/extra) ~tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) ~amaterasu_(fate/extra).

Removing tamamo_cat_(fate/grand_order) implication is fine, though.

I don't think spoilers are a real problem for Extra, since character names are revealed almost immediately and classes are not as important in it as they are in the previous instalments of the franchise. It seems fine to move with the implications for characters post F/Z, as albert said in that topic.

+1 for this - we may need an umbrella tag because the situation's only to get worse with Tamamo, since there's a lore reason for there to be at least 9 variants and you can be sure they'll try to milk her popularity as much as they can.

MyrMindservant said:

Caster's true name is a spoiler in Fate/Extra.

I would question this. Maybe you need your memory refreshed, or maybe you've only read that it's a spoiler. I'll put this video in spoiler tags for you, but here is the scene where Caster's true name is revealed.

JK does not need a character tag when she's visually identical to Tamamo, wearing a costume that Tamamo also wears, and is only a separate character in a single gag scene that's never mentioned again.

Wow I said this thinking you were proposing the tag and not realizing you had already gone through and added the character tag by yourself to all of them last month. IMO that tag needs to go.

WakuWaku said:

JK does not need a character tag when she's visually identical to Tamamo, wearing a costume that Tamamo also wears, and is only a separate character in a single gag scene that's never mentioned again.

Wow I said this thinking you were proposing the tag and not realizing you had already gone through and added the character tag by yourself to all of them last month. IMO that tag needs to go.

I think it's fine. I see this as a similar situation to saber bride, who is not Artoria Pendragon as you may have assumed, when that costume was initially released. Looking at the wiki for that tag, it still only claims to be a different costume of saber extra. The tamamo jk tag describes exactly what the character in that getup is about, so I don't see it as a big issue at this point. I do understand being iffy about this, though.

I don't think a costume with less than 30 images should have it's own character tag. I think it's a slippery slope considering the number of outfits in Fate and superfluous character tags like this are only going to ruin the effort to clean up the Fate tags. Saber Bride was a bit different since TM themselves pushed that and it was the primary outfit for CCC. It was also retroactively justified by FGO. This is just one of a dozen costumes Tamamo has in Extella.

WakuWaku said:

Yeah, OK. That's understandable. So I guess we should only use the tamamo jk tag if it becomes a part of the Tamamo 9, which will need the tamamo (fate) (all) tag.

The bulk update request #1387 (forum #139325) has been approved by @albert.