BUR #7197 has been rejected.
rename king_(the_owl_house) -> king_clawthorne
Eda adopted him officially in "Eda's Requiem"
Posted under Tags
BUR #7197 has been rejected.
rename king_(the_owl_house) -> king_clawthorne
Eda adopted him officially in "Eda's Requiem"
I think that counts as a name that is a spoiler. So while it may be technically correct, I think it should be avoided.
See howto:character
Whenever possible, characters should be tagged with their full name. However, some characters are only known by a single name (like Chen). Other times, their full name may be considered a spoiler. Usually these should be tagged with the single name, adding a _(series) qualifier if it is ambiguous.
More information is needed in regards of this being a "spoiler". Is it an important spoiler or not?
Even if this is a spoiler, it's completely useless in context of the actual series, because if you search for the character, you will find his full name "king clawthorne" in one of the first searches on google. It makes no sense for us to "hide" something, what everyone else will find anyway.
forum #179025
If the spoiler is really major (see Fate's Archer) then we really need more information about this specific case here.
I just downvoted it, because I don't see why we should use a rename instead of a alias here.
In "Eda's Requiem" (S2E07), King hints a surprise for Eda, and he later reveals at the end of the Gland Prix that he is legally changing his name to King Clawthorne after her
As I generally don't know how we handle marriages or adoptions in renaming characters, I have no deeper opinion on this.
Updated
Guaro said:
More information is needed in regards of this being a "spoiler". Is it an important spoiler or not?
The series is pretty episodic in nature, so this name will probably only spoil "Eda's Requiem", and I wouldn't say that it's a particularly big spoiler.
But on the other hand, due to the episodic nature of the show, I wouldn't be surprised if this information is never referenced again.
First result on google for me when searching for "king owl house" is the full name, so it's definitely not a hidden spoiler. However if it's really a name that's only referenced in one episode I don't see the point in having it as the main tag.
Is there a point in not having it be the main tag if it's canonical? This is western naming order, so it's not like it'd mess up autocomplete. This seems very similar to Nadia la Arwall where the series also essentially never references her surname either and also had mild spoiler concerns, but we decided to alias in that case very recently.
Well, this thread makes it sound like it was only mentioned in one episode and never again. It's hard to tell whether it's the full name or just something from a one-off episode.
What's more, this seems like an acquired name that he got halfway through the series rather than a name the character had all along. Here's a similar discussion from the comments in the wiki. Have we had any cases where we changed a character's tag because of a legal name change in-universe?
Shinjidude said:
Is there a point in not having it be the main tag if it's canonical? This is western naming order, so it's not like it'd mess up autocomplete. This seems very similar to Nadia la Arwall where the series also essentially never references her surname either and also had mild spoiler concerns, but we decided to alias in that case very recently.
I always thought that spoiler names were avoided regardless of the size of the spoiler. But if that's just the case for major spoilers; and if there's precedent for using the last names for characters that are rarely or never referred to by those names, then I agree that "king_clawthorne" should be the main tag.
nonamethanks said:
Well, this thread makes it sound like it was only mentioned in one episode and never again. It's hard to tell whether it's the full name or just something from a one-off episode.
I'm only on episode 24 and this change happens in episode 26, so it's solely speculation on my part that the name won't be significant/mentioned again.
Guaro said:
I don't see why we should use a rename instead of a alias here.
I agree. Without the alias, it's much more challenging for someone who doesn't know King's last name to find him.
So -1 for now, but I'd say +1 for an alias of king_(the_owl_house) -> king_clawthorne
BUR #7214 has been approved by @evazion.
create alias king_(the_owl_house) -> king_clawthorne
Alternative option
The bulk update request #7197 (forum #196592) has been rejected by @evazion.
The bulk update request #7214 (forum #196691) has been approved by @evazion.
