What tag should we use for all the Idolmaster trading cards?

Posted under Tags

Idolmaster images like:

post #1803693
post #1664388
post #1066910

appear to be, and are, listed as trading cards on other sites.

I couldn't find a discussion or thread as to why they don't have a distinctive tag on this site, (since they're so many), or why they don't even carry a card_(medium) or trading_card tag.

I just want a second opinion if they should just get a card_medium tag (only the card posts, not the clean versions) or if a new tag should be created. I'll do the tagging myself.

Actually, a lot of cards aren't tagged official art,
especially the minor characters, even though all the pictures they have are of these cards.
Also, if you search that, there's a lot of promotional scans as well, not to mention the clean versions so it's hopelessly vague.

RaisingK said:

cinderella_girls_card_parody?

Seriously? that tag exists but we don't have a "cinderella_girls_trading_card" or something?
That's like "character_cosplay" existing for a character that doesn't have a tag.

It's a tag that has not only existed almost as long as cinderella girls but was discussed before it's creation. It's a very specific motif and I see zero relation to your hypothetical character_cosplay.

Log said:

It's a tag that has not only existed almost as long as cinderella girls but was discussed before it's creation. It's a very specific motif and I see zero relation to your hypothetical character_cosplay.

by "character_cosplay" I meant the word "character" as a asterisk "*", replacement for a character that, in this hypothetical situation didn't have a name attributed on the site at the time. But I'm getting side-tracked.

How about a generic but all inclusive "idolmaster_trading_card" tag?
Since cinderella_girls_card_parody exists, fan creations wouldn't get the previous tag attributed so we could add official_art and card_(medium) as tag implications. But I guess that's a different matter.

1