Implicating 2d_animation → animated
Link to implication

Reason:

Self explanatory

I'd argue it's more like this:

Aliasing 2d_animation -> animation

Because the 2d_animation tag doesn't need to exist. You want to see 2d animation? Just do a search of animation -3d. Done. Easy. No additional tags required.

I agree with Dyrone, -1 to imply and +1 to alias. Unless we're about to start tagging posts with 2d to contrast 3d, this tag would be redundant.

You also misspelt it, and we don't use "animation", we use "animated"; 2d_animation -> animated. I'm amazed it has 1.8k posts tagged...

Dyrone said:
I'd argue it's more like this:

Aliasing 2d_animation -> animation

Because the 2d_animation tag doesn't need to exist. You want to see 2d animation? Just do a search of animation -3d. Done. Easy. No additional tags required.

Siral_Exan said:
I agree with Dyrone, -1 to imply and +1 to alias. Unless we're about to start tagging posts with 2d to contrast 3d, this tag would be redundant.

You also misspelt it, and we don't use "animation", we use "animated"; 2d_animation -> animated. I'm amazed it has 1.8k posts tagged...

I'd rebuttal with the 3d_animation tag needs to exist as well, but the name for said tag needs to be 3d_(artwork)_animation or cg_animation.

Pixel animations are already implicated on the site. And the whole point of tags like this is to remove part of the search process

(Siral I corrected the spelling)

Versperus said:
Pixel animations are already implicated on the site.

That tag shouldn't exist either. If a tag can be easily and completely replaced by a simple 2-word search...why does it exist?

Dyrone said:
That tag shouldn't exist either. If a tag can be easily and completely replaced by a simple 2-word search...why does it exist?

The whole point of tags such as this is to remove extra tags that could be replaced by a singular tag. Especially considering there is a limit to how many tags one can look up per search, having such a tag is beneficial.

Using one tag to represent two is unnecessary if the two give you exactly what you want. How often are you gonna need to search for 5 other things in addition to 2d_animation?

This isn't the same as, say, mane_six, which is (or would've been if it wasn't aliased away) a stand-in for 6 character tags and makes it possible to search for more specific images containing those characters together without a privileged account. See forum #237233 and forum #217980 for more info on that.

not a huge fan of the idea of intentionally slamming people into the 6-tag limit

+1 for aliasing it away, for the reasons already mentioned. This is yet another tag that should've at least been discussed before it was created (and mass-tagged).

Genjar said:
+1 for aliasing it away, for the reasons already mentioned. This is yet another tag that should've at least been discussed before it was created (and mass-tagged).

I discussed it with active staff. Also the tag has been around for a while just sparsely used. So I've added the wiki and increased the tag results for applicable animations.

Versperus said:
and increased the tag results for applicable animations.

So...you just searched for "animation -3d" and starting tagging everything then? I mean...it's not hard to tag because we already have a search that produces EXACTLY the same result...which is why it shouldn't be a tag.

Seems like a pretty pig-headed move on your part...literally have 4 people telling you the tag shouldn't even exist and your response is to tag it more and create a wiki page? Jesus...I feel like mass-removing it now.

Dyrone said:
So...you just searched for "animation -3d" and starting tagging everything then? I mean...it's not hard to tag because we already have a search that produces EXACTLY the same result...which is why it shouldn't be a tag.

Seems like a pretty pig-headed move on your part...literally have 4 people telling you the tag shouldn't even exist and your response is to tag it more and create a wiki page? Jesus...I feel like mass-removing it now.

No. This is what I searched, and you could feel free to mass remove all the tags. But than you would be removing a valid tag which would be tagging abuse, as well as doing it knowingly. Just because you don't understand a tag doesn't remove the validity of it.
https://e621.net/post/index/1/-flash%20-3d_(artwork)%20-2d_animation%20animated%20-pixel_(artwork)%20-slideshow#

There is also Claymation which is a tag I can't even add to the remove search due to not having enough tag search options to remove. And the real animations, but sub-categories don't make any sense because there is only 3d animations and 2d animations right?

To be quite frank, lest an active admin tells me not to add the tag. I will keep improving the results for it.

Versperus said:
you could feel free to mass remove all the tags. But than you would be removing a valid tag which would be tagging abuse, as well as doing it knowingly.

It's not a valid tag...what makes you say that it is? Just cause you tagged it 3,000 times? It's a bullshit tag no one ever used until you came along and made it a thing. If I started tagging "red_furred_wolf" on every image of a wolf with red fur and I did that 3,000 times is that a valid tag now? NO.

Versperus said:
No. This is what I searched...
https://e621.net/post/index/1/-flash%20-3d_(artwork)%20-2d_animation%20animated%20-pixel_(artwork)%20-slideshow#

You're purposefully creating a bloated bullshit search to prove your point...you don't need to omit pixel art and flash, both are 2d and should be tagged with your stupid tag. Perhaps flash probably could be use for rudimentary 3d, but I've never seen one...but even so then it would be tagged as 3d_(artwork) should be covered by "-3d_(artwork)"

Slideshows are already not tagged with "animated"...so that's another unnecessary omission.

So your real search would be: https://e621.net/post/index/1/%20animated%20-3d_(artwork)%20-2d_animation%20

Versperus said:
To be quite frank, lest an active admin tells me not to add the tag. I will keep improving the results for it.

To be quite frank, lest an active admin tells me not to remove the tag. I will remove it.

Dyrone said:
you don't need to omit pixel art [...], are 2d and should be tagged with your stupid tag.

Not always. You can make a 3D rendering of something then convert it into a fairly convincing 16-color sprite. Many older games (eg. Donkey Kong Country) used this technique a lot.

BlueDingo said:
Not always. You can make a 3D rendering of something then convert it into a fairly convincing 16-color sprite. Many older games (eg. Donkey Kong Country) used this technique a lot.

That's almost a separate topic as to whether or not sprites created in that manner would be considered 3d or not...considering the frames of their sprite are essentially snapshots of a 3d model, but the animation itself is decidedly 2d...the sprites exist in a 2d space.

Dyrone said:
To be quite frank, lest an active admin tells me not to remove the tag. I will remove it.

Don't remove the tag.

We could always use more descriptive tags for different styles of animation. Mairo made a few other suggestions for things here.

NotMeNotYou said:
Don't remove the tag.

We could always use more descriptive tags for different styles of animation. Mairo made a few other suggestions for things here.

It's not describing a style of animation. If it was I wouldn't oppose it. Read his damn wiki entry on the tag...it's not describing a style, it's describing a medium which is the NORM. If you follow this same logic then every single 2d still image on the site should have a freaking 2d_(artwork) tag.

Dyrone said:
That's almost a separate topic as to whether or not sprites created in that manner would be considered 3d or not...considering the frames of their sprite are essentially snapshots of a 3d model, but the animation itself is decidedly 2d...the sprites exist in a 2d space.

Technically, a webm video is that as well. Unless the 3D animation is being generated live (like in a 3D video game), the version of it you're seeing is a 2D representation of it, be it sprite or video. Anyway, this little detail isn't taken into account when tagging.

Dyrone said:
It's not describing a style of animation. If it was I wouldn't oppose it. Read his damn wiki entry on the tag...it's not describing a style, it's describing a medium which is the NORM. If you follow this same logic then every single 2d still image on the site should have a freaking 2d_(artwork) tag.

Following that logic we should remove all 3D related tags because they, too, are just 2D pictures or 2D movies. Nothing shown on our page, with the exception of stereograms, are presented in a truly 3D format, we just get the 2D end results.

NotMeNotYou said:
Following that logic we should remove all 3D related tags because they, too, are just 2D pictures or 2D movies. Nothing shown on our page, with the exception of stereograms, are presented in a truly 3D format, we just get the 2D end results.

Did you quote the wrong message? It's almost like you're responding to my post about the 3d donkey kong sprites and not the one you quoted. I'm not saying that at all...so...nice straw man I guess.

You still haven't said exactly why it's a "style"...it's not...it's a medium that can contain styles...it's not a style itself. That's like saying drawings that exist on paper are a style.

And why you think something that could easily be achieved with a 2-tag search should get it's own tag...like I said before this makes tags like "red_furred_wolf" valid because I'm too damn lazy to make a search for "red_fur wolf"...should I just start mass adding those tags? Are those valid now? how about "blue-eyed_red_furred_wolf"...sounds like a great tag to me. I wouldn't want to have to do a 3 tag search you know.

Dyrone said:
Did you quote he wrong message? It's almost like you're responding to my post about the 3d donkey kong sprites and not the one you quoted. I'm not saying that at all...so...nice straw man I guess.

You still haven't said exactly why it's a "style"...it's not...and why you think something that could easily be achieved with a 2-tag search should get it's own tag...like I said before this makes tags like "red_furred_wolf" valid because I"m too damn lazy to make a search for "red_fur wolf"...should I just start mass adding those tags? Are those valid now? how about "blue-eyed_red_furred_wolf"...sounds like a great tag to me. I wouldn't want to have to do a 3 tag search you know.

I wasn't lying or bloating the search options I set to get to (mostly) 2d_animations images. There are quite a few things that don't apply. It isn't just 2 tags

Versperus said:
I wasn't lying or bloating the search options I set to get to (mostly) 2d_animations images. There are quite a few things that don't apply. It isn't just 2 tags

Wow...dude...you were...I categorically explained how you were. Saying "nuh-uh" is not a counter-arguement.

NotMeNotYou said:
We could always use more descriptive tags for different styles of animation. Mairo made a few other suggestions for things here.

All animations are either 2D or 3D.
There's already the 3d_(artwork) tag for the latter, and 2d_(artwork) was deemed unnecessary because it's possible to just search for -3d_(artwork).

3D_(artwork) already covers animations, and with negative search it allows searching for 2D animations: -3d_(artwork) animated. So the 2d_animation tag is highly redundant.

as a typical user, my habits would be as follows:

if i want to search for only 2d animations: animated -3d
if i want to search for only 3d animations: animated 3d
if i want to search for only pixel art animations: animated pixel_art

there are instances where convention outweighs logic, and to fight against it can be a never-ending battle. to always decide all user interface designs based purely on logic and not on existing conventions would be a mistake as it can sometimes hinder user experience.

is it "logical" that most users view 3d art as a distinct category that needs to be tagged as such but not 2d art? not really. is it a convention that most users (and other galleries) accept? yes. hence why eventually you made the decision to remove a tag like 2d_(artwork), not due to logic but convention and perceived redundancy.