An implication for fictional skin colors

BUR #3457 has been rejected.

create implication green_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication red_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication grey_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication white_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication pink_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication blue_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication yellow_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication orange_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication purple_skin -> fantasy_skin
create implication black_skin -> fantasy_skin

They are listed in the tag group as 'abnormal skin', however the term usually defines something undesirable and as the intended meaning is not related to clinical conditions I propose the tag 'fantasy_skin' to be more descriptive.

EDIT: The bulk update request #3457 (forum #172805) has been rejected by @evazion.

I believe the wiki refers to 'abnormal colors' from a real life viewpoint. I don't think the implications are really necessary, but the wiki could be reworked.

Two things:

• Colored skin would be more consistent with colored eyelashes and colored pubic hair. These are two similar tags for unnatural eyelash/pubic hair colors.
• These skin colors aren't necessarily abnormal for the character. Orcs for example naturally have green skin. So these tags don't necessarily mean "a regular human with an unnatural skin color".

The bulk update request #3457 (forum #172805) has been rejected by @evazion.

Rejecting because this got a lot of downvotes. I don't necessarily think a colored skin umbrella tag would be a bad idea though.

+1 for an umbrella tag

I'm not against a colored skin umbrella tag too. The main reason this BUR was rejected was because "fantasy skin" doesn't sound very good and objective at all, while Colored Skin sounds a lot better for this.

BUR #3669 has been approved by @evazion.

create implication green_skin -> colored_skin
create implication red_skin -> colored_skin
create implication grey_skin -> colored_skin
create implication white_skin -> colored_skin
create implication pink_skin -> colored_skin
create implication blue_skin -> colored_skin
create implication yellow_skin -> colored_skin
create implication orange_skin -> colored_skin
create implication purple_skin -> colored_skin
create implication black_skin -> colored_skin

Making the request so people can vote for it as suggested by evazion.
If any skin color is missing, please add it to the BUR.

If the majority is for this BUR, someone would need to make a better wiki for colored_skin. Otherwise the now existing 'wiki' can be deleted again.

In my opinion there should be some way to distinguish human and non-human skin apart. For instance, a non-human character could have brown skin, but the color can't be tagged so because brown skin is aliased to dark skin.

Zupi said:

In my opinion there should be some way to distinguish human and non-human skin apart. For instance, a non-human character could have brown skin, but the color can't be tagged so because brown skin is aliased to dark skin.

There are probably a few with red skin out there as well, from heat like sunburn.

I agree. Looking for aliens is kinda hard.

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

The bulk update request #3669 (forum #174248) has been approved by @evazion.

Should any cases where it's not clear that the illustrator was intending to draw a character with white skin be removed from the white skin tag? eg. monochrome, spot color and most limited palette or partially colored images

Also, should stuff with what could be described as "very pale skin" (e.g. post #4022741 or post #4356526) be removed?

Or does the implication from white skin to colored skin want to be scrapped?