Robot implications

BUR #3835 has been rejected.

create implication humanoid_robot -> robot
create implication android -> robot
create implication mecha -> robot

I think there's a lot of confusion regarding tagging robots. The android tag, for example, contains many images that would (by the wiki definitions) better fit under the humanoid_robot tag, but I suspect said tag has gone largely unnoticed by the average user (since there's only about 400 images in that tag, but over 9000 for android). And there's already so much crosstalk between android and robot that IMO it makes sense to just implicate all androids as robots ('cuz they are robots) and have users who want non-android robots to just search with robot -android. Same goes for mecha implicating robot; the only one that I'm not completely sold on is the mecha_musume implication, since half of those seem to be "girl dressed as a robot".

A mecha is a giant robot. A mecha musume is a girl whose costume resembles a robot. They should be kept separate.

nonamethanks said:

A mecha is a giant robot. A mecha musume is a girl whose costume resembles a robot. They should be kept separate.

That's kinda what I was waffling on. I've edited out the create implication mecha_musume -> mecha

The humanoid_robot tag was supposed to be for images that were humanoid form, but would not qualify as an android as they lack a human appearance. Having android implicate humanoid_robot would destroy that distinction and always require a negative search to attempt to replicate the original intention of the tag. Though I will admit the tag appears to need massive cleanup.

NWF_Renim said:

The humanoid_robot tag was supposed to be for images that were humanoid form, but would not qualify as an android as they lack a human appearance. Having android implicate humanoid_robot would destroy that distinction and always require a negative search to attempt to replicate the original intention of the tag. Though I will admit the tag appears to need massive cleanup.

Yeah, one way or another, a huge chunk of the android tag should be tagged humanoid_robot, and a fair chunk of the humanoid_robot tag is already tagged android as well. But as it is right now, the humanoid_robot tag is basically useless, because it hardly refers to any of its intended subjects.

The current definition of the robot tag suggests that it is a catchall tag to be used only when tags like android and mecha do not apply. The set of implications you're proposing would redefine it as an umbrella tag for all robotic devices.

I can't help but feel like we'd be losing something by redefining the robot in this way, but I guess the sad truth is that it's so badly misused that it's effectively an umbrella tag already. Searching for "realistic" robots like post #2365778 among all the cute mechanical girls is like finding a needle in a haystack.

iridescent_slime said:

The current definition of the robot tag suggests that it is a catchall tag to be used only when tags like android and mecha do not apply. The set of implications you're proposing would redefine it as an umbrella tag for all robotic devices.

I can't help but feel like we'd be losing something by redefining the robot in this way, but I guess the sad truth is that it's so badly misused that it's effectively an umbrella tag already. Searching for "realistic" robots like post #2365778 among all the cute mechanical girls is like finding a needle in a haystack.

Yeah, my thought was that it would be easier to use it as a catch-all and then use exclusionary search if you specifically don't want androids, etc. In light of the previous discussion, I've also updated the request so that android implies robot, not humanoid_robot

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.

The bulk update request #3835 (forum #175324) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.