*_cover as meta

BUR #24189 has been rejected.

category cover -> meta
category cover_page -> meta
category cover_image -> meta
category doujin_cover -> meta
category album_cover -> meta
category magazine_cover -> meta
category novel_cover -> meta
category fake_cover -> meta
category manga_cover -> meta
category dvd_cover -> meta
category fake_magazine_cover -> meta
category video_game_cover -> meta
category back_cover -> meta
category comic_cover -> meta
category blu-ray_cover -> meta
category laserdisc_cover -> meta
category vhs_cover -> meta
category tankoubon_cover -> meta
category jav_cover -> meta
category clear_file_(medium) -> meta

meta tag describes not what the image depicts but the image itself. how it was created or how it was distributed and so on. help:metatags if anything.
i would also request a bulk update for *_(medium) -> meta but i'm not sure if formatting will let me do this. i'm reluctant to write it one by one.

upd. i consider meta tags as significant tags that tell me a crucial information (along with copy and char ones). understanding of whether this post is a scan or a doujinshi cover is more valuable than whether there are depicted two girls or car. this request is more about to bring convenience while browsing

Can't agree with this because you've got stuff like magazine cover which has fake magazine cover implicated to it. So it's not actually a meta tag but as visual descriptor. Same for all of those, they have a lot of parodies and fake mock-ups.

zetsubousensei said:

Can't agree with this because you've got stuff like magazine cover which has fake magazine cover implicated to it. So it's not actually a meta tag but as visual descriptor. Same for all of those, they have a lot of parodies and fake mock-ups.

from my standpoint, mock-ups and parodies also should be in meta. how much fake magazine cover and album cover redraw are different? the first doesn't refer to any existing cover (usually? but could) and the second does. and we still have magazine scan in meta but magazine cover in general. i don't get it well

untai said:

from my standpoint, mock-ups and parodies also should be in meta. how much fake magazine cover and album cover redraw are different? the first doesn't refer to any existing cover (usually? but could) and the second does. and we still have magazine scan in meta but magazine cover in general. i don't get it well

It's a matter of the tags describing something that is visually present in the image.

Fake magazine cover/magazine cover is something that can be seen in the image by anyone because of typical visual elements, unlike the magazine scans that rely on someone actually having the meta-knowledge about the source of the image, because someone who doesn't have this outside info just cannot tell it is a scan.

I guess the case of album cover redraw is debatable in what type it should be, but saying parodies and mock-ups should be in meta implies that meme and therefore every specific meme tag should also be meta, which just cannot work.

Mayhem-Chan said:

It's a matter of the tags describing something that is visually present in the image.

Fake magazine cover/magazine cover is something that can be seen in the image by anyone because of typical visual elements, unlike the magazine scans that rely on someone actually having the meta-knowledge about the source of the image, because someone who doesn't have this outside info just cannot tell it is a scan.

I guess the case of album cover redraw is debatable in what type it should be, but saying parodies and mock-ups should be in meta implies that meme and therefore every specific meme tag should also be meta, which just cannot work.

ok, i think i begin to understand how danbooru defines meta.

when you say about typical visual elements, i can't help but agree with you. at the same time, it just helps us to recognize them because magazine covers share the same pattern. when it comes to album covers or back covers, their pattern not as established as for book covers, and you can get only a plain image. which is quite a meta-knowledge, perhaps. because when i look at the any of album cover post, i see not an album cover but the image that was used for it. that image was created to be a cover. i believe there is a big semiotic difference.

my idea was to get the source media (media in/on which an image was originally distributed) to be meta. like anime screencap and screencap redraw, or game cg. also, i don't care for changing a category for parodies and memes and such.

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

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 45 days.

The bulk update request #24189 (forum #272352) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.