Alias Aluber's alternative names

BUR #18736 has been rejected.

create alias aluber_the_dogmatic -> aluber_the_jester_of_despia
create alias the_bystial_aluber -> aluber_the_jester_of_despia

While it hasn't come up yet, These are three names for the same character that are visually identical save for Jester, who wears a mask.

Pixiv has three tags for this character: 凶導者アルベル (Aluber the Dogmatic), デスピアの導化アルベル (Aluber The Jester of Despia), and 深淵の獣アルベル (The Bystial Aluber). All three tags are used interchangeably, with Jester being the most popular one. Jester is tagged both with and without mask.

Since these tags don't exist yet, do I need to add the character: prefix to them?

kah0922 said:

BUR #18736 has been rejected.

create alias aluber_the_dogmatic -> aluber_the_jester_of_despia
create alias the_bystial_aluber -> aluber_the_jester_of_despia

While it hasn't come up yet, These are three names for the same character that are visually identical save for Jester, who wears a mask.

Pixiv has three tags for this character: 凶導者アルベル (Aluber the Dogmatic), デスピアの導化アルベル (Aluber The Jester of Despia), and 深淵の獣アルベル (The Bystial Aluber). All three tags are used interchangeably, with Jester being the most popular one. Jester is tagged both with and without mask.

The Bystial Aluber actually does look different it's him with horns and a bigger cape which there is 1 post of it so that should be implicated to an aluber_(yu-gi-oh!) tag. since things are usually implicated to "name"_(yu-gi-oh!) if we do know the character's name. The only instance i know of where we go straight to the original monster is lady_of_the_labrynth to labrynth_of_the_silver_castle since she doesn't really have a name we can separate out.

RaisinBread said:

The Bystial Aluber actually does look different it's him with horns and a bigger cape which there is 1 post of it so that should be implicated to an aluber_(yu-gi-oh!) tag. since things are usually implicated to "name"_(yu-gi-oh!) if we do know the character's name. The only instance i know of where we go straight to the original monster is lady_of_the_labrynth to labrynth_of_the_silver_castle since she doesn't really have a name we can separate out.

It's happened with Albaz The Ashen and Fallen of Albaz, where there is very little visual difference between the two... "forms"...

Also the cape in The Bystial Aluber is identical to the one shown in Aluber the Dogmatic, so the only real difference are the horns (and the mask with Jester), which I don't think is enough to warrant its own tag.

kah0922 said:

It's happened with Albaz The Ashen and Fallen of Albaz, where there is very little visual difference between the two... "forms"...

Also the cape in The Bystial Aluber is identical to the one shown in Aluber the Dogmatic, so the only real difference are the horns (and the mask with Jester), which I don't think is enough to warrant its own tag.

Maybe it's a perspective thing but to me it seems like the collar of the cape ends at around the middle of his head on jester and it goes wider and ends above his head in bystial aluber.

Personally I like keeping them separate since sometimes you get posts where cards appear as actual cards or specifically referencing the card like post #5281355 with albaz the ashenbut that's gone since it's aliased. Not really a big deal to me if it gets aliased or not but remember to add the japanese names for dogmatic and bystial to the other names part of aluber's wiki so it autofills from pixiv

BUR #19422 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

remove alias albaz_the_ashen -> fallen_of_albaz

RaisinBread said:

Personally I like keeping them separate since sometimes you get posts where cards appear as actual cards or specifically referencing the card like post #5281355 with albaz the ashenbut that's gone since it's aliased.

Honestly, I'm reconsidering the alias. We typically tag characters, but in this case it's the card itself in its totality that is being drawn/referenced, not the generic character contained in it. There shouldn't be any harm in keeping this as an implication.

The bulk update request #19422 (forum #251958) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

BUR #19627 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication albaz_the_ashen -> fallen_of_albaz

Wouldn't let me approve this in one go.

The bulk update request #19627 (forum #252860) has been approved by @nonamethanks.

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

Since this is about to expire, anyone have any idea what to do with the Aluber names?

If we're going by card lore, then Aluber the Dogmatic would be for the unmasked form and Aluber the Jester of Despia would be for the masked form, but Pixiv users consistently interchange those tags with each other (This image features The Bystial Aluber, but it's tagged with Aluber the Dogmatic and Aluber the Jester of Despia).
If we want to go with implications, then Aluber the Jester of Despia should be the primary tag.

If we're going by card lore, then Aluber the Dogmatic would be for the unmasked form and Aluber the Jester of Despia would be for the masked form, but Pixiv users consistently interchange those tags with each other (This image features The Bystial Aluber, but it's tagged with Aluber the Dogmatic and Aluber the Jester of Despia).

For the multiple tags thing I think they just do multiple tags because they can't do a general "Aluber (yu-gi-oh!)" tag so it helps with discoverability if they have all of them tagged.
As for dogmatic and jester being used interchangeably it's likely just a case of some people not knowing that the token has a name so they just tag Jester since that's what the main card's called.

If we want to go with implications, then Aluber the Jester of Despia should be the primary tag.

I'm more in favour of implying all 3 versions to a new Aluber (yu-gi-oh!) tag since that matches up with how Harpie Lady, Winda (yu-gi-oh!), Ecclesia (Yu-Gi-Oh!), and ki-sikil (yu-gi-oh!)/lil-la (yu-gi-oh!) have their implications done so it's easier to search for the original card.
EX. if Dogmatika Ecclesia the virtuous was the main tag instead of Ecclesia you wouldn't be able to find much of Dogmatika buried under the Cartesia, and Incredible Ecclesia posts.

I'm more in favour of implying all 3 versions to a new Aluber (yu-gi-oh!) tag since that matches up with how Harpie Lady, Winda (yu-gi-oh!), Ecclesia (Yu-Gi-Oh!), and ki-sikil (yu-gi-oh!)/lil-la (yu-gi-oh!) have their implications done so it's easier to search for the original card.
EX. if Dogmatika Ecclesia the virtuous was the main tag instead of Ecclesia you wouldn't be able to find much of Dogmatika buried under the Cartesia, and Incredible Ecclesia posts.

If we do an Aluber tag, then we'll need to imply The Bystial Lubellion, Lubellion the Searing Dragon, and Masquerade the Blazing Dragon.

BUR #19715 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

create implication the_bystial_aluber -> aluber_the_jester_of_despia
create implication aluber_the_jester_of_despia -> aluber_(yu-gi-oh!)
create implication the_bystial_lubellion -> aluber_(yu-gi-oh!)
create implication lubellion_the_searing_dragon -> aluber_(yu-gi-oh!)
create implication masquerade_the_blazing_dragon -> aluber_(yu-gi-oh!)

All alternate forms/cards of the same character.

After looking Pixiv over again and thinking about it, The Bystial Aluber has a clearly defined form, Aluber with no mask and horns, and is consistently tagged. That should be its own tag.

I am now of the opinion that Aluber the Dogmatic and Aluber the Jester of Despia should be aliased. If we do put them as separate tags, then every Aluber art we have on this site needs to be retagged to Aluber the Dogmatic (since none of them wear a mask), and that's not getting to post #5428163, which has the mask half appearing. The fact of the matter is that despite lore reasons, mask or no mask, this character is known as Aluber the Jester of Despia first and foremost. This is how the character is tagged on Pixiv, and how the character is known in the fandom.

I'd also add an implication for The Bystial Aluber for Aluber the Jester of Despia, just like how it is for Albaz the Ashen.

...Yu-Gi-Oh lore is fun.

kah0922 said:

After looking Pixiv over again and thinking about it, The Bystial Aluber has a clearly defined form, Aluber with no mask and horns, and is consistently tagged. That should be its own tag.

I am now of the opinion that Aluber the Dogmatic and Aluber the Jester of Despia should be aliased. If we do put them as separate tags, then every Aluber art we have on this site needs to be retagged to Aluber the Dogmatic (since none of them wear a mask), and that's not getting to post #5428163, which has the mask half appearing.

I'm against aliasing different cards into eachother for a few reasons. Yugioh character tags serve 3 purposes right now which are
1. Tag for identifying the character in the card/specific form
2. Tag for the card itself as a card(post #6138495)
3. Tag to identify a reference (post #1382241, post #6014017)
I can remove the implication from the bur and you can add 凶導者アルベル to the other names section of Jester's wiki so it achieves pretty much the same thing without introducing the need to unalias it if there's a future post that copies/references it completely like with albaz the ashen.

mask or no mask, this character is known as Aluber the Jester of Despia first and foremost. This is how the character is tagged on Pixiv, and how the character is known in the fandom.

From what I've seen people just call him "aluber" when discussing the character jester/dogmatic/bystial are just after thoughts unless it's about gameplay.

I'd also add an implication for The Bystial Aluber for Aluber the Jester of Despia, just like how it is for Albaz the Ashen.

I'll go change the implication be bystial-> jester

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 45 days.

The bulk update request #18736 (forum #249230) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

Aluber the Dogmatic is now an empty tag still in the BUR, please fix this.

nonamethanks said:

Aluber the Dogmatic is now an empty tag still in the BUR, please fix this.

Sorry forgot to do that, it's been removed from the bur now.