Template talk:Tagging

Series Types

There needs to be a better "type" for H-games than just "video game" or "visual novel". A great number of H-games do not rightly fall under either of those. (I've added taimanin asagi just now with the simple type "Adult Game", as ja.Wikipedia refers to it.) PeopleDon'tDanceNoMore (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

A real template and about alias

Is it good to make it a real template? Like this

{{Tag
Catagory=(Content, Creator, etc)
Type=
Description=
Japanese=
Related=
Note=
Slave Tags=
}}

If it is useful I'll try to work on it.

Another thing is about the alias, if something different appears on certain release's credit page, is it good to point them out or just ignore them? Or, set up more pages? I'm a bit confused.--Lord of Evil ^{Leave Message} 01:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

The situation could be more complicated if the circle/artist has some international authorization, making both transliteration and translated names exist, the eng-dl site consists a lot of examples, another situation could be the authorized Chinese/Korean publishment.--Lord of Evil ^{Leave Message} 01:55, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

English DLSite counts for exactly nothing. Generally, if it's not raw, it should be an absolute last resort. PeopleDon'tDanceNoMore (talk) 03:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

That's what I'm fearing about. There are already tags being grouped using reference from english dl site, see my posts in "The Tag Grouping/Blacklist Discussion".--Lord of Evil ^{Leave Message} 04:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't think there's really enough formatting to get any benefit from abstracting it.

As far as different spellings or translations generally go, pick one, and then as far as we're concerned, that's all there is, no need to mention anything else: if there are other versions, they can be grouped and linked in the Slave Tags link. PeopleDon'tDanceNoMore (talk) 03:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

The spelling is not a big deal cause the slave tag system is good enough to solve it, but the actual alias is confusing, at least they don't seem look-alike.--Lord of Evil ^{Leave Message} 04:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean. Examples can be very useful. (Specific examples.) PeopleDon'tDanceNoMore (talk) 05:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

You know I was told to follow this template instead of adding "Alias" section, all I can do is to put it in "Note", either to repeat the link for both "note" and "related", or don't the alias info it in "note" at all. The most recent exampe, artist miyauchi izumi and onizuka takuto with his (not their) related circle (not circles) crown brigade and alice-do‎, both artist and circle have alternative names, now put them altogether in the related section, the reader must be confused, if just the spelling difference, they should know it's the same artist/circle. This is not. I'm a bit confused too. Note that these tags in the gallery is a mess too, some gallery title used both of the names for a same circle, but actually only one appears on the credit page. A clear format to deal with alternative names, pseudonym changing and related problems will be helpful. --Lord of Evil ^{Leave Message} 05:21, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

This is my philosophy: As a rule, any circle name that is not an alternative spelling or a translation is a different circle. I don't rightly know what's up with Crown Brigade and Alice-Do, but IMO they are different circles. Would you say that Work X that says "Crown Brigade" in its credits was by "Alice-Do"? I wouldn't. At best, I would say it's by the same person who makes up Alice-Do.

For that reason, I would never want an "Alias" entry for circles. If absolutely need be, "Related" can link one circle to another and "Note" may explain the circumstances. Such cases may include direct inheritance, like with oboro and oboro and tempo gensui dou; or concurrent output in different areas, like with studio sunadokei and b side. Any other (possibly uncofirmed or unconfirmable) cases should only be linked through the Artist's page, IMO. (This means that, IMO, "Crown Brigade" and "Alice-Do" should not be directly linked; they should only both appear on the Artist page(s).)

As for Artists...if we make an "Alias" entry, I think we shouldn't have a "Related" entry any more, but instead a "Circle" entry. As it stands, "Related" is vague, and therefore appropriate for handling both aliases and circles; but if we were to take the aliases out and put them in their own entry, it would be pointless to retain that vague abstraction.

I can kind of go either way, really. I think there's a decent sense in clicking a "Related" link on one Artist and ending up at another, and letting that imply that they are the same person. Certainly it's not perfect "sense", though, which is why I would also be happy with specific "Alias" and "Circle" entries instead. PeopleDon'tDanceNoMore (talk) 07:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)