Posted under General
忍猫 said:
user:Secretsec8 non-web_source
The name of the website the images were found on was in the source field which added the non-web source tag to these images.
This is because the script tags everything that doesn't have a link as non-web source. The tag needs a lot of gardening because of that.
I'm a bit concerned source:Imageboard is lumped into non-web_source. Image boards are online after all, The issue is just that we don't have the original link, not that someone had to go through a process of extracting an image from a game asset or scanning a poster or other things of that kind.
Two years ago, i suggested a Datamine tag, to group up artworks from videogame data. What ended up from this discussion has been non-web source, which is currently being used as umbrella tag for scan and the likes.
I'd like to re-propose a Datamine tag, or maybe like BrokenEagle suggested a game_asset tag.
Datamine (or game asset, whatever you want to call it) sounds fine.
Mysterious_Uploader said:
... or maybe like BrokenEagle suggested a game_asset tag.
That was actually ☆♪ (forum #151382). Regardless, I prefer the tag game asset myself for those images pulled directly from games, as it has a much clearer understanding to it, and as ☆♪ mentioned, data mining has a much different definition.
+1 for game_asset.
Seeing the original intent of the proposed tag was to prevent source_request from being used on inapplicable images, would the tag exclude cases where official art in browser games is accessible from the web, or can otherwise be properly sourced? post #3815844 for example. (Admittedly, Granblue Fantasy is the most popular and prolific copyright this applies to by far, and most of its web-accessible artwork gets replaced by better quality versions later.)
7HS said:
Seeing the original intent of the proposed tag was to prevent source_request from being used on inapplicable images, would the tag exclude cases where official art in browser games is accessible from the web, or can otherwise be properly sourced?
Yes, that was the idea. Also, if used correctly it would help differentiating between direct extractions and screenshots.
