Topic: Can multiple sonas be tagged as one character?

There's a friend I regularly draw and post art of, and they have a couple different fursonas of different species. I would like to tag these characters so they're easier to find in my gallery, but I'm not sure of how to go about it.

Should I make a different tag for each sona, like "jennifer_(fox)" and "jennifer_(dog)"? Can I tag them all as a representation of that friend, like "jennifer_(jennifer)" for both the fox and dog? Should I do both, like "jennifer_(fox)_(jennifer)"?

They have no username other than their first name, and all their sonas are basically named after them. I'd like to keep it all under one tag as to easily find all the "jennifer" art but I don't know if that's common practice.

(Name changed for anonymity.)

If the characters are unique designs they should each have their own tags. If they are just alternate species variations of the same basic design they should probably share a tag.

jennifer_(jennifer) and jennifer_(fox) are not sufficiently unique character tag names. If your friend's username is literally just their first name on every site they use (unlikely unless they have a very unique first name) then I guess you could ask them what they'd like to be identified as in the character tag. Otherwise you can look for a site where they have a more unique username and use that.

Do not use the same tag for multiple distinct characters. Please see howto:tag characters and the proper naming format for such cases.

If you have to use the same first name for multiple characters owned by the same owner, you should go with name_the_<species>_(<owner>).

See also https://e621.net/forum_topics/36918 where it was decided that it is allowed to have lots of completely disparate designs under the same tag of "etis".

There's also the examples like Kiffin. Kiffin Softpaw is before a major redesign. Other than character owner, they are not the same. There's a time period where you can notice the species suddenly changing. Many artists and character owners have done this.

There are rare cases I guess it makes sense to use the same character name if they're some shape shifter? Species name is tagged separately, then? Not remotely sure on that, like the Etis example.

For an example of a species like this, Pokemon has the land and sky forms of Shaymin.

aaronfranke said:
See also https://e621.net/forum_topics/36918 where it was decided that it is allowed to have lots of completely disparate designs under the same tag of "etis".

Past decisions can and should be reevaluated once in a while

Also you don't know if the admin who made the decision was a nutjob

gattonero2001 said:
Also you don't know if the admin who made the decision was a nutjob

Heyyy. We're all nutjobs here, thankyouverymuch. :p

They really have no socials.
According to the tagging rules, the most logical option would be the "jennifer_the_fox_(jennifer)" format. I know one of their sonas has a fuller name, so it can be "jennifer_mcfox_(jennifer)", but the others really are just their first name.

Am I on the right track?

sandentwinks said:
They really have no socials.
According to the tagging rules, the most logical option would be the "jennifer_the_fox_(jennifer)" format. I know one of their sonas has a fuller name, so it can be "jennifer_mcfox_(jennifer)", but the others really are just their first name.

Am I on the right track?

Ideally, the full name variant without the character owner suffix, jennifer_mcfox, would take precedence if it is truly unique.
This means that it does not have a similarly named character in or outside of e6. You will need to do the search yourself with the actual name.
If the character's name is not unique as described above, then you should go with jennifer_mcfox_(jennifer).

Alternatively, if the character's full name cannot actually be found anywhere online or is not public knowledge (and wanting to keep it private), then you can go with jennifer_the_fox_(jennifer) instead.

If they're effectively the same character, they should have the same tag. If they're a generic dog in one image, and a generic fox in another, where each acts similar and would acknowledge events that happened to them as the other species, they should generally be under the same tag as the same character. The species tags are there to say what species are present, we don't need to combo a character tag and species tag, IMO. As it is, <name>_the_<species> style tags are discouraged because it creates confusion with species_transformation and alternate_species, and gets people thinking the character needs a new tag for every species they may appear as.

It's fairly rare that the same character gets different tags just for being a different species. Even stuff like link_(wolf_form) works with particular visual design differences, along with people more readily separating them as distinct personas -- not all Link-as-a-wolf posts are tagged link_(wolf_form), and not all link_(wolf_form) posts show Link as a wolf, for example.

watsit said:
If they're effectively the same character, they should have the same tag.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Do not use the same tag for multiple distinct characters. Please see howto:tag characters and the proper naming format for such cases.

If you have to use the same first name for multiple characters owned by the same owner, you should go with name_the_<species>_(<owner>).

Well now I'm confused.
I think that I'll go with the jennifer_(jennifer) format since it doesn't seem to be in use. If only to find all posts that feature Jennifer, under the same tag. These characters really are "Jennifer but as a dog" and have no strong identity of their own. Besides, there *is* species transformation going on.

That and jennifer_the_human_(jennifer) sounds silly now that I think of it.

sandentwinks said:
Well now I'm confused.
I think that I'll go with the jennifer_(jennifer) format since it doesn't seem to be in use. If only to find all posts that feature Jennifer, under the same tag. These characters really are "Jennifer but as a dog" and have no strong identity of their own. Besides, there *is* species transformation going on.

That and jennifer_the_human_(jennifer) sounds silly now that I think of it.

We only allow name_the_<species>_(<owner>) in very rare circumstances, though they are generally dissuaded due to what @Watsit said.

If the character has no "base form" or original species, then jennifer_(jennifer) or jennifer_mcfox would do just fine.