Tag implication: kemonomimi_mode -> animal_ears

Implicating kemonomimi_mode -> animal_ears

Reason: by definition.

+1. It's a pretty obvious subset.

forum #41298

Perhaps kemonomimi_mode should be renamed then. It seems somewhat awkward to have it named "animal ears mode" when it's defined as something broader.

Cyberia-Mix said:
forum #41298

Indeed, a kemonomimi_mode -animal_ears tag search returns quite a few posts with characters having only tails, antlers, etc. but it's pretty confusing since kemonomimi is about animal ears by definition.

If there's a more appropriate tag for these posts, maybe a cleanup and a stricter wiki definition for kemonomimi_mode is in order?

Edit: Ah, ninja'd again.

This might help for cleanup: forum #73839

The name was chosen as a reference to nekomimi_mode, not because it is restricted to animal ears. We haven't ever had problems with this tag's usage.

Why should they be split up? Animal features are animal features. They're clearly the same concept and should be grouped and tagged together. Kemonomimi_mode was never a great tag name, anyway. It was just used because no one had any better ideas.

I think it'd be simpler to just rename the tag to animal feature_mode.

Going back to the thread that founded the tag forum #32806, yes the name is a reference to nekomimi_mode, but much of the conversation actually suggests that the intentions of the tag was focused on it applying really to only animal ears (hence the naming kemonomimi_mode). There is only the OP's comment in there that suggests that it could cover other aspects too, and the conversation does not build on that suggestion at all.

That only means it was never debated or a point of contention, just the name and whether or not it'd be useful.

Basically, Bapabooiee wrote the wiki for it and we use the tag the way he defined it. (and I like the current wiki)

I agree with S1eth. If people say the problem is with the name, then change the name, not the definition. Find a more appropriate name and alias the current tag to it.

No need for a new tag as any current de facto use of kemonomimi mode will definitely fall under the new tag, and if they want the original definition, we have animal ears.

Rampardos said:
I think it'd be simpler to just rename the tag to animal feature_mode.

That sounds good. Or simply animal_feature.

That's kind of vague. Including mode makes it's purpose clear and also keeps it somewhat familiar.

Where would horns fall? It's a distinct enough concept from having animal ears/tail. Horn_added? Tail_added? Ears_added? And implicate all to something like attribute_added? Putting everything in a "X_added" pattern appeals to me. I know we have other "character given something they don't normally have" tags, but they aren't coming to mind at the moment.

RaisingK said:
I know we have other "character given something they don't normally have" tags, but they aren't coming to mind at the moment.

There's bespectacled, for characters that don't normally have glasses but have them in that image, but that's all I can think of and it doesn't really fit this conversation that well.

There's also enmaided. It's about wearing a maid outfit but it's similar in that it's used for non-maids.

The whole purpose of kemonomimi_mode was to lump as many animal features as possible together, for the sake simplicity. The focus is on the fact that the characters don't normally have the features, not the specific kind of features they gain. I really don't think its necessary to split up the different kinds of features, that's what horns and cat_ears are for.

Unless you're talking about demon horns, or something else not animal related.

post #1083716 and post #1083712 are what I had in mind.

I can get behind behind a bespectacled-ish tag for horns and wings, which aren't always taken from an animal. (mechanical_wings, angel_wings). And if the feature is taken from a specific animal, it would also be tagged kemonomimi_mode as usual.