Posted under General
The character in question is based on Miku and is basically her with an alternate costume and color. The artist even says as much.
Moreover, artist commentary and Pixiv tags don't necessarily conflict with "no metaknowledge" or the "tagging rules of Danbooru", as CDP5280 puts it, since both are sometimes used to tag or better understand an image. But he and a couple others disagree, so I want it settled.
Updated by user 143344
There's a number of posts in the trap tag and such that are only tagged as such because the artist said so on pixiv, not due to any feature visible in the image, so there's quite a bit of precedent for tagging artist commentary - it's more like 'word of God' in this case.
The "no metaknowledge" guideline, so far as I'm aware, is primarily intended to discourage situations like someone tagging every sill plain post with slave because she happens to canonically be a slave - never mind that it bears no relevance to most of the images and only serves to clutter the latter tag. Here, the resemblance to Miku is obvious in the image and we can't presume that anyone browsing the hatsune miku tag would be uninterested in seeing a dark-skinned, recostumed take on her, so it would not apply.
Tagging an image according to its artist's description can make the audience realize something that normally they would not see. In the case of post #705735 I'd tag it as hatsune miku along with original since
a) no harm done
b) increase the popularity of that pic
c) make everyone realize that IS Miku
Katajanmarja said:
Perhaps posting the artist comment (and preferably its translation) under the image should be required in cases like this?
It'd probably be helpful in most disputes, but not this one specifically considering the guy commented that he didn't care what the artist said or tagged it with.
What I posted there:
"Leave the Miku tag on. There is no reason not to tag it Miku if the artist explicitly states that it is Miku. "Tag what you see" is indeed one of out core tenets, but it's not something that you need to follow with utterly, completely dogmatic devotion, all exceptions be damned. For identifying characters, artist comments are often very important."
Case closed.
The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the original tag should be off. original should be used when the character is not from an established IP, and since the above post is essentially a recolored Hatsune Miku, that just isn't the case.
I would like to hear some arguments for keeping the original tag on though.
Updated
I think it'd probably be better if the original tag remained. While the character is based on Hatsune Miku, the character is very clearly not Hatsune Miku. The original tag can be used to indicate that it is an original version of the character, much like how we have individual tags for specific variants of Hatsune Miku (it's just that there will never be enough images of this variant to warrant it's own tag).
Isn't there a tag for variations on a character...? I could've sworn there was.
Anyhow, there have always been some tags that can't be applied based purely on what you see (familial relationship tags, say, are almost never obvious from context -- but I'd say they're still clearly worth having. An even better example might be trap, which is very often indistinguishable from androgynous, flat_chest, etc unless you know the character -- if we literally only tagged trap based on what's in the image, the tag's list would be almost empty.)
I would tend to say 'inspired by' things should have the appropriate tag for what inspired them as long as, once you know what to look for, you'd say "oh, I see that!" on examining the image. It generally just seems more useful -- I'd rather have a tag that shows a variant on Hatsune Miku show up in a search for her than not.
However, we should probably create a character_variant or inspired_by_character / inspired_by_copyright tag or something for things like these, to make it clear. Well, inspired_by is a clunky way of wording it, but you get the idea. To me, the important thing is to ask "is this image something you'd want to have show up in a search for this tag?" And the answer here seems to be an obvious 'yes'.
Xabid said:
Isn't there a tag for variations on a character...? I could've sworn there was.Anyhow, there have always been some tags that can't be applied based purely on what you see (familial relationship tags, say, are almost never obvious from context -- but I'd say they're still clearly worth having. An even better example might be trap, which is very often indistinguishable from androgynous, flat_chest, etc unless you know the character -- if we literally only tagged trap based on what's in the image, the tag's list would be almost empty.)
I would tend to say 'inspired by' things should have the appropriate tag for what inspired them as long as, once you know what to look for, you'd say "oh, I see that!" on examining the image. It generally just seems more useful -- I'd rather have a tag that shows a variant on Hatsune Miku show up in a search for her than not.
However, we should probably create a character_variant or inspired_by_character / inspired_by_copyright tag or something for things like these, to make it clear. Well, inspired_by is a clunky way of wording it, but you get the idea. To me, the important thing is to ask "is this image something you'd want to have show up in a search for this tag?" And the answer here seems to be an obvious 'yes'.
Alternate_costume would fit that.
