Do we count characters that are not really in the picture, but just depicted in/on an object in the picture, like a book cover, painting or some such?
I don't count those, but there are posts where they do get counted.
Updated
Posted under General
I compiled the result of the various character counting threads (forum #81917, forum #72781 and forum #76701) into a synopsis for the the wiki entries of 1girl etc:
Dolls only count if they act on their own.
Depictions of characters on paintings etc don't count.
If the presence of a character is only implicated it doesn't count.
Schrobby said:
Depictions of characters on paintings etc don't count.
Hmm... What about, say, post #1224312?
Would this fall under
picnic said:
a major role in the work
category?
S1eth said:
I'll ask again about tagging 1boy with those faceless males. For example post #1308494? After all, we do tag those kinds of images solo.
I'm a bit confused on how exactly we're defining a "faceless/nameless other" (as the solo wiki puts it). Do we count them out for the purposes of xboy(s)/solo if most of their body is in the image but we can't see their face? (as in post #531630?) If not, where do we draw the line on how much of their body?
And just for clarification, implied characters include off-screen characters referenced by dialogue as well as partially off-screen characters whose clothing/body parts are still identifiable, correct?
What about cases like post #698951 or pool #3100 (post #530240 for an extreme case) where there is no significant portion of the body on screen but characters are strongly implicated by their clothing? There's obviously girls in these specific works, and it's easy enough to count them.
It always seemed to me like usage of this tag category would be nebulous at best.
S1eth said:
I'll ask again about tagging 1boy with those faceless males. For example post #1308494? After all, we do tag those kinds of images solo.
I'd say a faceless male is still a male, so it counts. post #1308494 is tagged 1boy and 1girl, tagging this solo is a complete contradiction.
EB said:
I'm a bit confused on how exactly we're defining a "faceless/nameless other" (as the solo wiki puts it). Do we count them out for the purposes of xboy(s)/solo if most of their body is in the image but we can't see their face? (as in post #531630?) If not, where do we draw the line on how much of their body?
Good question. There are also those who have a face and only miss eyes. I think it's not important for counting, though.
Sex with a faceless male is solo? Sex with thin air? Masturbation? Tagging this solo is completely wrong. I think we should count any character as long as the gender is identifiable.
picnic said:
And just for clarification, implied characters include off-screen characters referenced by dialogue as well as partially off-screen characters whose clothing/body parts are still identifiable, correct?
Yup, but once there are body parts involved it's no implication anymore, if we can identify said character.
What about cases like post #698951 or pool #3100 (post #530240 for an extreme case) where there is no significant portion of the body on screen but characters are strongly implicated by their clothing? There's obviously girls in these specific works, and it's easy enough to count them.
It always seemed to me like usage of this tag category would be nebulous at best.
I'd say tag the name if something in the picture identifies a character (like dialogue if the character says something), but unless a part of the body is visible don't count them.
Schrobby said:
I'd say tag the name if something in the picture identifies a character (like dialogue if the character says something), but unless a part of the body is visible don't count them.
I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. For tagging "the name" (I assume you mean character tag), we use whatever information we have, including meta knowledge, such as the artist's comments/tags.
If you mean tagging off-screen characters who have a speech bubble, I say no.
S1eth said:
I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. For tagging "the name" (I assume you mean character tag), we use whatever information we have, including meta knowledge, such as the artist's comments/tags.
Exactly.
If you mean tagging off-screen characters who have a speech bubble, I say no.
What if they can be clearly identified, like with the off-screen character's hat in the respective speech bubble? I remember some touhou comic having those.