Donmai

create alias star-shaped_pupils -> +_+

Posted under Tags

bipface

BUR #4641 has been rejected.

create alias star-shaped_pupils -> +_+

since we have

star_eyes → +_+

and

cross-shaped_pupils → +_+

logically, we should have

star-shaped_pupils → +_+

if there's meant to be some distinction between star-shaped_pupils and +_+, it's not getting honoured, and the wikis don't make it clear.

wiki for +_+:

When a character's eyes light up in excitement (such as in post #397254) or have a star-like appearance (such as Nia Teppelin).

aliases: starry_eyes, cross-shaped_pupils, star_eyes
14K posts

considering that description and those existing aliases (esp. star(ry)_eyes), this covers every case whether the whole eye or just the pupils, and makes no distinction about number of points on the star.

wiki for star-shaped pupils:

When a character's pupils are shaped like a star, usually to indicate excitement. This tag is only for when the entire pupil is shaped like a star, use star in eye for cases where there is a star present inside the eyes.

(no aliases)
7K posts

again, no distinction about number of points on the star; it seems this tag gets used more often for 5-pointed stars, but there's plenty of counterexamples such as post #3880478 (at time of writing)

Updated

Reply
Unbreakable NWF Renim Mexiguy Alex MKW yyflandre Nacha
Mexiguy

Unbreakable said:

While the aliases can make it misleading, I think the tags are distinct enough to keep them seperate, +_+ are supposed to be for eyes looking like sparkles while star-shaped pupils are for pupils looking like stars, do these symbols get mixed up in the base tag as often as the eye tags?

Yeah, the problem is the dumb aliases and the fact that, since +_+ has more posts its' aliases pop-up first on the autocomplete list when typing both codestar/code and codestar_/code, so people who don't know better just click on them without much thought, making the problem even worse.

Reply
Mexiguy

blindVigil said:

The mention of Nia Teppelin in the + + wiki is pretty out of place, since her pupils don't even remotely match the shape that tag is supposedly intended for. They're more like pluses than "stars". I always thought they were supposed resemble flowers, personally.

Yeah, it's so out of place I went to the wiki history to see if it was vandalism, but it was put there by the guy who wrote the wiki back in 2009

Reply
NWF Renim

There are several different depictions here, and it might be worthwhile to consider making +_+ a parent tag of many of the four-point/armed crosses/sparkles/stars with child tags, as opposed to having them all aliased to +_+. I think there can bit a good amount of gray area between these, so I don't think it would be possibly to purely separate them. What should be possible though is separating the 5 or more pointed star shaped pupils/eyes from the 4 point/arm pupils/eyes.

Here are a sample of some of the types ending up in either +_+ or star-shaped_pupils

Reply
bipface

i've tried to identify more precisely the shapes we're dealing with,

  • star-polygon types, characterised by straight edges and tapered points (sometimes also with rounded points).

5 or more points is most common.

4 points is most common, though depending on the type of aperture more points is a possibility.

  • crossed-bars: + , × , † , ✳️ , etc.

characterised by straight edges with no tapering or curvature (aside from possibly rounded caps).
4 points is most common though 3 or 5+ points (e.g. asterisk) can occur too — see ://i.imgur.com/56oBmBk.png .

we also have 'pinched' shapes to handle such as post #4171680 or post #4319663

the biggest problem i see with these distinctions is that many (careless) artists seem to draw their diffraction spikes without any curvature (e.g. post #4016127 ) so they'd fall into the star-polygon category.

not sure if this gets us any closer to a solution, but at least a clearer understanding of the problem

Updated

Reply
1