I don't see why they'd need this double qualifier, considering it's now a different name. They had the double qualifier because it was the same name as the "regular Arknights" character. Also if they DO for some reason need a double qualifier it should be in the same order for everyone, Laevatein's are reversed.
Either way, we have snowshine_(arknights: endfield), but also da_pan_(endfield)_(arknights) and chen_qianyu_(arknights) so clearly we need to decide how exactly we're going to standardise/qualify endfield characters. imo they should just have _(arknights), or _(endfield)_(arknights) if there's a name conflict/an existing character has a different design in Endfield.
I don't think they had, since angelina_(arknights) and angelina_(endfield) doesn't introduce any ambiguity.
The other characters (such as Chen Qianyu or Perlica) were simply named _(arknights) because at the end of the day they're Arknights characters, so Angelina followed suit when she was firt shown - but since there was ambiguity as a result, _(endfield) was added before _(arknights).
I would stay with this, skins for Amiya's conversions are already cumbersome
Open questions:
1. What to to with arknights:_endfield? Should it be just endfield to be consistent with character tags? My opinion: rename arknights:_endfield to endfield and create something like arknights_series which will be implied by both arknights and endfield
2. Should Endfield character tags of "clones" imply their Arknights counterpart? My opinion: yes, if they actually have the same personality and not just some similar looking character
3. Should Endfield character tags have an alias for original Arknights codename? My opinion: yes, though unsure. What if we alias Angelina -> Gilberta and then actual Angelina is introduced?
I'm kind of torn on making the qualifier just "_(endfield)" instead of just sticking with _(arknights), or using _(arknights:_endfield) if it really needs to be specified that it's a character from Arknights Endfield specifically.
I don't particularly know any precedent off the top of my head for cases like this, but to me it feels as if all the GFL Exilium characters had their qualifier be _(exilium). Feels off.
nukleer said:
1. What to to with arknights:_endfield? Should it be just endfield to be consistent with character tags? My opinion: rename arknights:_endfield to endfield and create something like arknights_series which will be implied by both arknights and endfield
No matter what is done with character qualifiers, the copyright tag should stay Arknights: Endfield, it makes no sense to rename the copyright. As to whether or not it's useful to make a series tag when it only has 2 games, I'm not really sure.
As for the character tags, I can think of two examples: 1. bailu (honkai: star rail) appears only in one game, and therefore uses the full game name. 2. saber (fate) refers to a specific character from multiple entries, uses just the series name as a qualifier, is implied by alters, and is not implied by other saber-faces.
I will point out in Snowshine's case that her qualifier is like that because it was originally rendered as Snowshine (Arknights) (Endfield), despite the fact that a) there is no Snowshine in OG!Arknights (since Snowshine is an Aurora clone); b) even if we did go with double qualifiers, (arknights) (endfield) would not be the proper order for them anyway. I only noticed it because someone made her a wiki, and I swooped in to correct it with her current qualifier, unaware of what the current situation on qualifiers for Endfield is (had I known Laevatein (Arknights) (Endfield) existed, I would've corrected it the same way).
I'm kind of torn on making the qualifier just "_(endfield)" instead of just sticking with _(arknights), or using _(arknights:_endfield) if it really needs to be specified that it's a character from Arknights Endfield specifically.
Yeah, thought about this a little longer and I agree with this. It's official name afterall
Astolfo said:
As to whether or not it's useful to make a series tag when it only has 2 games, I'm not really sure.
They also have multiple series of manga and multiple seasons of anime so it will be useful in future, also it doesn't complicate things much in the present.
Updated BUR (revision 4) 1. Full _(arknights:_endfield) identifier is more suitable for characters... is it? We need to decide this 2. Added implications for arknights_(series), see above
You don't have to keep everything in a single BUR. Multiple BURs can be made to vote on different subjects (or on the same subjects with different options).
Spin-off of arknights - arknights:_endfield was announced some time ago. This BUR creates a single tag for everything in the Arknights' universe and adds necessary implications. Arknights also has multiple seasons of anime and muliple series of manga so this will be useful.
Arknights also has multiple seasons of anime and muliple series of manga so this will be useful.
Technically speaking, Arknights getting an anime and manga means nothing for the creation of an overarching series tag. Kantai Collection has Kantai Collection (Anime) and KanColle Arcade, which are all based on the same original source with the same characters, so it didn't get a series tag. Girls' Frontline also got an anime and manga adapting its story but it is all lumped under the same tag because it doesn't do anything different aside from adding new characters and having to accomodate for them in the existing story; there's also GFL's chibi anime with its own original material, but it too didn't get a tag either, because it doesn't have as much representation on Danbooru. For an anime or manga to count, it would have to be way more distinct than just adapting Arknights' story or being a collection of stories related to the operators.
All of this is to say that I do support the BUR, since Endfield will likely get lots of attention fanart-wise and it'd be best not to clog up the tag for the original game.
Some of the Arknights: Endfield characters appear to be clones (or some other lore thing, irrelevant) of the original Arknights characters and have the same personality. This BUR adds relevant updates: 1. Aliases ArknightsName (arknights: endfield) → EndfieldName (arknights: endfield) - they are often referred by their Arknights codename, though it is techically wrong 2. Implications EndfieldName (arknights: endfield) → ArknightsName (arknights) - they are the "same" character (Angelina already has such an implication approved)
For an anime or manga to count, it would have to be way more distinct than just adapting Arknights' story or being a collection of stories related to the operators.
For what it's worth, the manga also feature original secondary characters. I am not sure if they have any art on danbooru, but some appear for multiple chapters.
For what it's worth, the manga also feature original secondary characters. I am not sure if they have any art on danbooru, but some appear for multiple chapters.
I mean, I did point out the original manga characters on GFL's end; its manga, Doll's Song, has its own original Commander, and several secondary characters inhabiting the positions of other Commanders who appear in multiple chapters, and the proper anime would use the manga as its base for its adaptation, with some changes here and there to try and reconcile with game details (to varying success). Beyond Gentiane, not counting official art, there's only one piece of fanart that features these secondary characters, and they're all lumped together with Girls' Frontline. M4 SOPMOD II Jr is the only chartag to emerge from the chibi anime that was made, meanwhile, as fanart of that anime is also just lumped into GFL.
Of course, everything I just said might just be bullshit that's happens to be the case because no one bothered to make copytags for any of these; Azur Lane: Slow Ahead exists, after all.
Open questions: 1. How to unify character suffix? — from previous discussion, _(arknights:_endfield) seems to be appropriate. Also, it's official name 2. Is BUR #35220 actually needed? — already existing implication angelina_(endfield)→angelina suggests that yes
