Donmai

Removing "animal" tag from pokemon posts that don't feature animals

Posted under Tags

Zalza

BUR #34091 has been rejected.

mass update favgroup:38216 -> -animal

Pokemon and simmilar creatures such as pals are not considered animals tagging wise so pokemon_(creature) animal should be for pictures of pokemon interacting with real life animals post #6177219 post #4680343 post #5017892 post #3860881 post #8335500.

Then the grey area is stuff like with sentient animal like characters from other franchises post #6849340.

I don't consider pokemon drawn as realistic versions of the animals they are to be animals post #7238577, but I do when they are transformed into alternate species post #8200129 then stuff like this would be borderline post #2356118 because I don't think the artist thinks eeveelutions are rabits so this is meant as some alternate species.

The only exception is this post #446270 because that's litterally just a cat.

I made a back up of the favgroup before removing the actual animals favgroup #38230 so for the ones that were removed from search, that being the ones that ARE considered worthy of the animal tag see favgroup:38230 -favgroup:38216.

Note however, future lurkers, that when/if this bur goes through the favgroups will likely be deleted as I (at the time of writing) am only member level so I will run out of fav group slots. Perhaps some higher up wants to preserve it for historical reasons if someone needs it, I don't know. If not I can make a comment below when the bur goes through with the post ids.

Updated

Reply
Unbreakable blindVigil LQ Zalza TheGamingRodent Red Terror WRS rainyd CasualStan Freshblink
zetsubousensei

Provence said:

creature
pokemon_(creature)

Use these tags well, people.

Pokemon are not supposed to be creature that's for unamed fantasy animals. But yes people need to use pokemon_(creature) more same with the digimon and duel monster equivalents.

blindVigil said:

Am I crazy for hoping this getting approved somehow leads to animal focus being restructured?

It can't lead to anything if you don't explain what your issue is, do you think fantasy animals shouldn't go in the tag?

Zalza said:

BUR #34091 has been rejected.

mass update favgroup:38216 -> -animal

I don't consider pokemon drawn as realistic versions of the animals they are to be animals post #7238577, but I do when they are transformed into alternate species post #8200129 then stuff like this would be borderline post #2356118 because I don't think the artist thinks eeveelutions are rabits so this is meant as some alternate species.

The only exception is this post #446270 because that's litterally just a cat.

I'm confused why the Meowth, which is literally just a cat (post #446270) should be allowed to stay in animal but the chatot which is literally just a bird (post #7238577) shouldn't. For my money unless it's an alt species we should just blanket keep "realistic" depictions out of the tag for consistency.

Reply
blindVigil

zetsubousensei said:

It can't lead to anything if you don't explain what your issue is, do you think fantasy animals shouldn't go in the tag?

My issue is exactly as it was back in https://danbooru.donmai.us/forum_topics/27651. I don't have a problem with pokemon that actually resemble animals being treated like animals, but Giratina and Charizard are not animals. Animal focus was intended for actual animals and stayed that way for years until a BUR thoughtlessly flooded it with Pokemon in the process of aliasing away some focus tags. Then suddenly people are saying, "Of course animal focus is appropriate to use on dragons and monsters and always has been."

This is only made worse if we're saying that even animal-like pokemon shouldn't be tagged animal. We're not being consistent with our nomenclature.

Reply
1