Posted under General
Tag alias:
Reason: Please check out the wiki of card and its posts. The new name is more intuitive and self-explanatory.
A few similar tags, for comparison:
(Important note: I volunteer to update the links of the wikis, like I often do, should the alias take place.)
Updated by jxh2154
-1
The card doesn't have to be held as seen in some examples for persona_4 card.
Implication of holding_one_card -> card makes more sense.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but following danbooru's plural/singular policy:
SystemXS said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but following danbooru's plural/singular policy:
- Mass-edit all posts under card to holding_one_card
psich said:
-1The card doesn't have to be held as seen in some examples for persona_4 card.
Possible alternative aliases to conform with the results of the search persona_4 card and make it clear that we have this exception to the singular/plural rule:
or, simply,
Updated
Danielx21 said:
This or single_card, it doesn't have to be anywhere near a hand. It could easily be on a table or something like post #35384 or post #807601. You're getting too hung up on the literal reading of the wiki that said (before I edited it) "a character holding a single card." The important part, I think, is "single" not "holding".
edit: I really don't get why a single card should be differentiated from multiple cards. If we do this for cards why not for other objects like feather, cats, ribbons, or books? Those and many more have singular -> plural or plural -> singular aliases.
Updated
jjj14 said:
This or single_card, it doesn't have to be anywhere near a hand.
I like your suggestion single_card better than one_card; but any of these would be good. (and much better than just card)
jjj14 said:
edit: I really don't get why a single card should be differentiated from multiple cards. If we do this for cards why not for other objects like feather, cats, ribbons, or books? Those and many more have singular -> plural or plural -> singular aliases.
I, too, don't get why this distinction must exist for a card. I hope we don't have single cat or single ribbon in the future. But hundreds of posts are tagged card for whatever reason, so my choice of action was improving the tag by getting rid of this terrible name rather than deleting the tag completely. I'd be happy if any of these things happened.
P.S.: Some tags of clothes and appearance that start with "one" or "single" are much more justifiable, because they would normally imply "two" or "both" without the initial unitary word. Some of them are:
one breast out, one eye covered, single thighhigh, single glove, single sock, single shoe
Another special mention is single braid.
jjj14 said:
(quotes)
I assumed the wiki at the time of posting was followed, and thus most images would be holding_one_card, following the OP. This doesn't seem to be the case though, and it's changed details quite a few times. Either way it looks like manual editing would be needed.
Log said:
forum #23232
Most everything seems fine as it is to me, though could perhaps use some clarification on the wikis.
Specific types:
they all imply card or card_(medium), though you'll have to add it manually.
Personally I'm in favor of the alias being to the singular card for the following reasons:
NWF_Renim said in forum #23232:
I think I'd favor using tags similar to that of photo and photo_(object). Images that are cards (or composed of cards) would use the card tag, and cards in images would use a cards_(object) (or card_(object), however support may go).
Additionally maybe a point to consider.
Danielx21 said:
I, too, don't get why this distinction must exist for a card.
jjj14 said:
I really don't get why a single card should be differentiated from multiple cards.
It generally shouldn't, hence why forum #14788 exists, far as I can tell.
Updated
I believe the reason for card and cards being distinct instead of being aliased like most nouns is so that the depiction of the face of a single card (e.g. with pactio card) can be differentiated from playing cards as objects in a scene which usually show up in sets. By the logic, the alias is actually the opposite of what was intended.
Perhaps we should:
As Danielx21 notes above the single_* or one_* tags only make sense when the default is a natural pair or set.
EDIT: This was discussed in forum #23232 and seems to have never been fully resolved
Shinjidude said:
- mass edit the appropriate instances of card → card_(medium) (which already exists)
- alias card → cards (or vice versa)
My replies:
Updated
Wow, no one had a problem with card until Danielx21 said we did, so I guess we better change everything we do from now on!
And single_braid was mentioned as an example when it's not; it's meant to be a braided ponytail like post #1022799. braid covers any instance of braids, even when the bulk of the hair doesn't make up the braid, such as post #1024899.
Updated
I changed my mind: I'm going to reply here instead of editing my last message. I completed my project of mass editing. These should be the results:
Hillside_Moose said:
Wow, no one had a problem with card until Danielx21 said we did, so I guess we better change everything we do from now on!
Somebody had to point out the problems of that tag sooner or later, regardless of your sarcastic remark. There are more of them than I initially expected, but this discussion is fruitful enough, so they are solvable.
P.S.: Everyone knows what is a single braid. single_braid was mentioned as an example of what that it's not?
Updated
Shinjidude said:
I believe the reason for card and cards being distinct instead of being aliased like most nouns is so that the depiction of the face of a single card (e.g. with pactio card) can be differentiated from playing cards as objects in a scene which usually show up in sets.
Probably, but that is highly confusing and the solution seems to have been card_(medium) for a while now.
Danielx21 said:
Just to be clear about the role of my recent cleanup work:If card and cards are merged, then card_(medium) won't be in the way. If that tag of a medium was the only obstacle, then we can just make this alias for a perfect result:
Sounds good to me. I've cleaned up the loli/shota version, though some cases were a bit borderline imo. But that's a slightly different topic, I've just converted them to card_(medium) for now. There wasn't much anyway.
I only saw two other problems mentioned throughout the threads.
Additionally we could have a card_deck tag (it was mentioned somewhere...) for depictions of a full deck of stacked cards. If so, it should probably imply card.
Off-topic:
Hillside_Moose said:
Wow, no one had a problem with card until Danielx21 said we did, so I guess we better change everything we do from now on!
Isn't that what this forum is mainly for? Finding problems and fixing them?
Updated
SystemXS said:
Personally I'm in favor of the alias being to the singular card for the following reasons: [...]
Shinjidude said:
Perhaps we should:
[...]
And I, Daniel, too support the idea of aliasing cards -> card. With three "votes", it a is pretty popular idea here.
Another popular idea is creating either holding card or holding cards. However, apparently it is a possibility to be considered, not a necessity. Shinjidude, for example, passively said "if holding_card(s) is neccessary [...]" and nobody expressed some strong opinion like "We really need the tag holding card! It would conform to some policy and whatnot!" or "It would help people who want to find these examples of images here!"
Anyway, at least holding card would be harmless and a good way to break down the tags called cards and card into a smaller big list. And, more importantly, if we had that new tag, then the possible distinctions between card and cards would be even less noticeable; the alias between the two old tags would be easier and more natural to do. That would be great.
So, I'll wait for possible answers in the near future, then I'm going to create and fill holding card (i.e. holding any number of cards) with many posts, if possible.
Updated
[Here is my long report. Short version: I created many detailed tags for cards, so cards can now be an alias to card.]
A. I checked all the posts tagged either card or cards. There were about 99 pages.
B. The tags card and cards basically have the same contents. In practice, they don't follow any easy distinction mentioned here. Any of these major situations below can be tagged either card or cards:
C. I created new tags to clarify what happens with each card: for example, "card between breasts" and "card in mouth". The two situations most discussed in this thread became specific tags too: "holding card" and "floating card". (because in Persona 4, cards float; I don't know why, I didn't play the game) They are listed under the item "I." of this message.
D. The new tags have varying levels of detailedness and value. For example, I am sure "too many cards" is a very important tag, while "card in basket" is forgettable. I'll just leave them all, for now. If any change/renaming/deletion/creation/merger/split/etc. is necessary, it can be done anytime in the future.
E. I filled all the new tags with all the applicable posts I found. Some of the new tags reached hundreds of posts.
F. In the list of new tags, the ones marked with a parenthesized asterisk (*) are noticeably underused, because I could not find 10 taggable posts for them. The ones marked with a triple bracketed number sign [###] are inherently incomplete because the idea of introducing them came to me in the middle of the work; although I did come back to find some old taggable posts for them.
G. The tags falling card and floating card often are indistinguishable. Oftentimes I just can't tell whether gravity is pulling the card or not in a stationary image, then I just use both tags simultaneously. Depending on the image, floating card and falling card can be different and recognizable concepts, but merging them into card_in_mid-air probably would be much more helpful in practice.
H. Once again, I could not see any post tagged either loli or shota, or edit their tags, because of that boring hierarchical restriction.
I.
animal_on_card (*)
blood-stained_card (*)
card_among_flowers (*)
card_background
card_between_breasts
card_between_toes (*)
card_creature
card_in_ass (*)
card_in_bag (*)
card_in_basket (*)
card_in_book (*)
card_in_clothes (*)
card_in_hat (*)
card_in_mouth
card_in_mouth_of_animal (*)
card_in_pocket (*)
card_on_fire
card_on_hat
card_on_mouth
card_on_person (*) [###]
card_on_necklace (*)
card_road (*) [###]
card_with_aura
falling_card
floating_card
frozen_card (*)
hair_card (*)
hand_on_card [###]
holding_card
holding_card_offscreen (*) [###]
hugging_card (*)
lying_card
piece_of_card (*)
pierced_card (*)
piercing_card (*)
pile_of_cards [###]
playing_card_theme [###]
person_on_card
suspended_card (*)
thrown_card
too_many_cards [###]
transparent_card (*)
virtual_card (*)
J. The existence of two separate tags named cards and card is the focus of this thread. Now, any distinction between them is less than merely unresolved and confusing; it's meaningless. Please create this alias:
K. Here are some useful implications to be created:
-
-
-
Updated
Danielx21 said:
- (Remove implication playing card -> cards)
- Add implication playing card -> card
It should be pointed out that the playing_card tag, as it is defined in the wiki, makes it more like tarot or pactio and that the images can either be the card (object) or the whole image is a card (medium). So the implication should just be removed, and no new implication established with it. Users should then have to add whether it's a card or card_(medium) separately.
NWF_Renim said:
Users should then have to add whether it's a card or card_(medium) separately.
Whew. This situation is quite complex. Where to start?
post #887904 is, without a doubt, taggable both playing card and card_(medium). (because its medium is a playing card) Additionally, because of the current implication "playing card -> cards", it is also tagged cards. Many other posts whose medium is a playing card are also tagged cards for the same reason.
In this thread, some people pointed out that card was being widely used as a substitute for card (medium). Then I and SystemXS fixed this problem. Apparently, we made sure card (medium) contains all the applicable images from card and cards.
Contrariwise, I said here that card (medium) does not contain any image that fits either card or cards alone. I failed at that, because of the "playing card -> cards" implication.
However, on second thought, that implication is not a Bad Thing™. I think the tag card should serve as a perfect catch-all for all instances of cards. If someone uses the tag card, I think he should see all the applicable posts, without exception. post #851124 is a card, too.
So, I propose this implication:
And I stand by this other, aforementioned, implication:
