Feature Suggestion: Adding a new "Notice" textfield to artist entries to deal with AI/repost accounts.

Context

This is a continuation of topic #25985 and topic #30408 where we've talked about ways of dealing with this.
Some examples were using an implication to a artist warning tag and qualifiers to mark artist entries.
While the intention behind these proposals was fine, many were either clunky to implement or required lots of maintenance through approvals, perhaps even both.
The biggest issue were edge cases with artists switching to AI, or AI-prompters becoming full-fledged artists.

The recent change where the upload page got those special notifications to deal with bad source uploads and pixel-perfect duplicates gave me the idea to tackle this problem in a different way.
The power of Danbooru is the immense collection of data that we have collected about artists, but most of it is buried deep in the Wiki/Forum which is pretty much invisible for someone going through the upload process.
Instead of trying to automate it using existing tech, why not first work on providing this information to the uploader as seamless as possible?
The uploader can then decide for themselves how to process that information.

How would it work?

Using shark lj as an example:
First, an artist entry would get a new "Notice" (name pending) textfield that could contain a short text message with a maximum of (for example) 140 characters.

New "Notice" textfield on Artist page

Then, when an uploader wants to upload an image from a source linked to that artist, the Notice text would be shown on the upload page. If an artist entry has no Notice text, nothing would be shown.

Yellow Notice warning above the tabs.

Note: This is just a mock-up. I know that screen real estate on the Upload page is very precious. If you have a better feel for UX, please do share your opinions!

Advantages

Note that the Notice text could be pretty much anything. So this wouldn't just be used to give warnings about AI, but could also help people when dealing with other types of accounts:

• Known AI uploader. Do not upload. forum #438778
• This is a repost account. Check for a proper source.
• This is the account of a commissioner. Look for the correct artist name in the replies.
• Artist switched to AI after May 2025. Doublecheck post timestamp. forum #426434
• All posts of this artist should be tagged as AI-assisted.
• Posts uncensored works on their Twitter.

Why not just use the artist's Wiki page?

We already do, but we use the an artist's wiki page to keep track of other things as well. As mentioned in help:artists:

A wiki can exist for an artist, but must be created from the new Wiki page. This is typically only reserved for important details such as requests not to merge with any alt artist entries, or if the entry is for a commissioner/reposter of some kind. Wikis for artists should not contain any of the URLs associated, to avoid any redundancy. Adding too many personal details should also be avoided.

If the artist has any named original characters, you may also list those characters on the wiki.

This would then require some kind of setting wether or not to show the wiki page, and dumping the entire wiki page of an artist on the upload page by default would be absolutely terrible.
I did consider adding the Notice field to wiki pages, but I do not know how that would affect non-artist wiki pages. If you have a more technical view, please do share your opinions.

There is also a second reason why storing the Notice seperately would be better:

Integration

For people messing with Userscripts or even automation, adding a seperate field would make doing a check on Artist tags really easy.
All they need to do is check if the Notice field is empty. If not, they can halt. No need to parse the contents of a wiki page.

In the case of the official Translate Pixiv Tags Danbooru userscript, it could add a mark to artists, strikethrough the text, different color. The world is your oyster.

❌-mark added to artist's name when using Translate Pixiv Tags

Better control and documentation

Changes to the Notice field would be tracked like we currently do with changes to the other fields.
For heavy warnings like "Do not post" we could make it a recommendation/requirement to add a link to the corresponding forum post where the decision was made.
If more oversight is needed the Notice field could be locked so only Builder+ users could edit it.
Change requests could then be done through a dedicated forum thread.

Thoughts?

I really, really like this idea, and I think it would be a much more elegant solution compared to having to make a wiki page for the artist entry, which is something that requires you to go somewhat out of your way - having this notice option on the artist entry edit page instead is much more intuitive and would likely be seen more (since DB users notoriously like to not read wikis).

Like you said, there's a lot of other potential situations that could be useful in this case, such as making notices for official accounts that are usually associated with a single artist but may have guest art (this one might not work as well though if the artist has other links... it was just an idea that came to my head), notices for group accounts (Lemoncremestudios comes to mind, they're a two-person doujin circle whose works get tagged with the circle entry and the specific artist if known), notices about VTuber accounts who may be both artists and frequent second-party sources, etc etc.

I do think the X mark on TPT is a bad idea if the notice field is used for things besides AI, though - ⚠️ might be a better choice.

I think restricting them to Builder+ is a good idea as well, because there are some recurring users who are very jumpy about accusing artists of using AI.

I'm not tech-savvy enough to give the sort of constructive feedback I think you need (I don't use userscripts for crying out loud!), but I really really really like this idea.

It dodges all the problems with our past failed proposals perfectly, and is flexible enough that it can not only account for edge cases, but can also be used for, say, repost accounts for example. And since we already got sourceless warnings now, I think this is both a logical and great next step.

I too agree Builder+ is a reasonable restriction to editing the field. I do not trust any of the members in the AI check thread to use this responsibly lol.

Given that builders routinely cannot tell whether things are AI or not and the accusations that already get incorrectly slung around in flags and the AI check threads, I don't think this field would work even being restricted to builder+ accounts. Maybe if it was only doable through BURs so that they can be vetted more heavily, but we don't have any BURs that work like that yet.