Tag Discussion: Shinrabanshou characters

Several months ago when I was on a Shinrabanshou tagging spree, I made a decision that until the comes a time when it's necessary, new Shinrabanshou characters were going to be named/tagged just by their general names when there are multiple variants; that is to say both 漆黒のシェイド (Jet Black Shade) and 暗黒騎士シェイド (Dark Knight Shade) would be tagged as simply shade_(shinrabanshou). This just makes things a bit less cluttered and confusing, especially since there aren't too many posts for most of these characters yet anyway. For reference purposes, I could eventually try to make wiki pages that link to images of the versions.

I'm not sure if we should naming convention to characters who don't have multiple versions, but who still have titles (as many of the characters do) as well; Ie: 桃華仙ミヤサ, currently tagged (inaccurately) as pink_bloom_miyabi simply becoming miyabi_(shinrabanshou) or what have you. It seems like titles could be left to the wiki without much trouble in terms of searching and it would make actually tagging characters easier for folks who aren't very skilled at reading/romanizing Kanji.

The vast majority of the characters that were/are already tagged when I got there seemed to ignore these titles/variants and using general names like I've been doing, but there are a few turning up more recently that seem to have kept them.

So! Thoughts and opinions on this method of tagging? I'd be glad to go through and edit the tags as necessary, if we decide to go that route. I certainly don't know a ton about Shinrabanshou, but I've been really enjoying researching it as best I can.

Oh. And while I'm on the subject, would a "list of Shinrabanshou characters" wiki entry be useful? (I'm sorry this is such a big wall of text.)

Poliwag said: Oh. And while I'm on the subject, would a "list of Shinrabanshou characters" wiki entry be useful? (I'm sorry this is such a big wall of text.)

Just to address this piece briefly, usually lists of characters go in the wiki for their copy: tag.

Sorry for the thread necro, but I was curious about this still and would like some input.

I have made a quick wiki article for one of the characters, Shizuku. Before I continue making articles for other characters, I would like to know if this format is acceptable or if we should begin creating new tags to refer to them by their title/form (which would mean adding titles to all of the existing characters as well even if they only had one form, I suppose.)

We still seem to be getting new characters tagged with the title included, I've noticed. I just want to make things consistent, accurate, and easy to access for people.

The wiki entry is well done, but the tag and many of the others listed under Shinrabanshou need copy qualifiers badly, like some already are. Look at how many other tags "Shizuku" could refer to.

I moved the wiki to shizuku_(shinrabanshou); jxh can delete shizuku.

Several of the tags that were qualified ended with "sho" instead of "shou"; arioch_(shinrabansho), beelzebub_(shinrabansho), belial_(shinrabansho), and asmodeus_(shinrabansho) had wiki pages.

Should Shizuku's different "versions" be tagged and then implicated to shizuku_(shinrabanshou) like how Ex-Keine implicates Kamishirasawa_Keine?

Astaroth is the only ambiguous tag under this copyright that has more than a handful of posts--somehow, it's got 322. Since so many of the other tags are already qualified, is it alright to mass edit this one?

RaisingK said: I moved the wiki to shizuku_(shinrabanshou); jxh can delete shizuku.

Thanks. Didn't delete though, added some links to other shikuzus.

reese said: Should Shizuku's different "versions" be tagged and then implicated to shizuku_(shinrabanshou) like how Ex-Keine implicates Kamishirasawa_Keine?

There's no real agreement on this but I still tend to prefer doing the implications (if and only if they're not spoilers) even though it throws off chartags: searches.

RaisingK said: Astaroth is the only ambiguous tag under this copyright that has more than a handful of posts--somehow, it's got 322. Since so many of the other tags are already qualified, is it alright to mass edit this one?

I'm tempted to alias given the numbers here. In fact, I will - it'll give people a window for readjustment and it can always be removed if another major astaroth arises.

jxh2154 said:
There's no real agreement on this but I still tend to prefer doing the implications (if and only if they're not spoilers) even though it throws off chartags: searches.

So would you like me to work on going through the current shinrabanshou images and adding the appropriate "version" tags to the posts and then report back here/make a post later with what needs to be implicated? I'd be up for that.

Also: would this, by proxy, mean that characters with only one current version don't need their title in the tag? [ie: there is only one form of Miyabi to date that I can spot, so she'd just be miyabi_(shinrabanshou) rather than the current pink_bloom_miyabi and if multiple versions arose later, we could add implications. Or shall we do it the other way and only make a generalized tag if more versions appear.)

Poliwag said:
So would you like me to work on going through the current shinrabanshou images and adding the appropriate "version" tags to the posts and then report back here/make a post later with what needs to be implicated? I'd be up for that.

Please do, thanks.

Also: would this, by proxy, mean that characters with only one current version don't need their title in the tag? [ie: there is only one form of Miyabi to date that I can spot, so she'd just be miyabi_(shinrabanshou) rather than the current pink_bloom_miyabi and if multiple versions arose later, we could add implications.

I'm not familiar with this franchise, but I would say that sounds like a yes.

The astaroth -> astaroth_(shinrabanshou) alias needs to be resent.

reese said:
The astaroth -> astaroth_(shinrabanshou) alias needs to be resent.

I tried out the "fix" feature on aliases for this, let me know if it sticks.

It sticks. I think the wiki article just needs to be moved.

reese said:
It sticks. I think the wiki article just needs to be moved.

Done