The tag alias #55688 multifurry -> multifur has been rejected.

Reason: alternative spelling

EDIT: The tag alias multifurry -> multifur (forum #322828) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

Seems a bit of a misnomer, since it doesn't have to apply to furries/anthros, or even be a "multiple-in-one" character. According to its wiki:

multifur says:
Having more body-parts than usual. More-so than what would be considered 'normal' for that species or character.

This covers a wide area of concepts, including certain split-form characters, multi-head, multi-arm, multi-leg, multi-breast, tail-mouth, and conjoined characters. It also applies to humanoid and scalie characters, not just furries. So it can be one human(oid) character with four legs and two arms, which is not what you'd expect from a term like multifur, while multiple characters within one normally-shaped anthro body is not a multifur. A kitsune is apparently a multifur according to wikifur for simply having two (or more) tails instead of one, while a fox_taur, which would count due to being a fox with more body parts than usual for the species, is arbitrarily excluded.

The intended concept seems to be pretty close to conjoined. Comparing post #3012855 to post #3045077, they're not significantly different looking. post #2873881 even has both tags. So maybe aliasing multifurry and multifur both to conjoined would be best.

I'm not a fan of either of these tags.

Seems like both should be replaced with conjoined, chimera, and/or split_form where appropriate. As well as stuff like 4_arms, etc.

bitwolfy said:
I'm not a fan of either of these tags.

Seems like both should be replaced with conjoined, chimera, and/or split_form where appropriate. As well as stuff like 4_arms, etc.

It would be useful to have an umbrella tag for multi_* tags IMO. multi_anatomy?

gattonero2001 said:
It would be useful to have an umbrella tag for multi_* tags IMO. multi_anatomy?

I think that is a good idea, actually. Multi_anatomy sounds pretty weird to me though, but I like the idea. Maybe… extra_anatomy? The term “multi” always sounds weird to me when used for things that are usually in multiples anyway, like eyes or fingers.

scaliespe said:
I think that is a good idea, actually. Multi_anatomy sounds pretty weird to me though, but I like the idea. Maybe… extra_anatomy? The term “multi” always sounds weird to me when used for things that are usually in multiples anyway, like eyes or fingers.

Both multi_anatomy and extra_anatomy sound wired to me. What about extra_body_parts?

bitwolfy said:
I'm not a fan of either of these tags.

Seconded!
Would've never noticed them or stumbled over them on my own when adding tags - Could never have guessed the meaning of those tags and they're not self-explanatory at all.

I don't like extra_anatomy or extra_body_parts:
A spider anthro with 6 arms would get tagged with 6_arms implying multi_arm implying multi_limb implying this umbrella tag, but they wouldn't have "extra" body parts for their species, just the "normal" amount.
The same applies to stuff like a feral machamp, 4 arms would be normal there

Maybe a tag group would work better?

shadyguy said:
I don't like extra_anatomy or extra_body_parts:
A spider anthro with 6 arms would get tagged with 6_arms implying multi_arm implying multi_limb implying this umbrella tag, but they wouldn't have "extra" body parts for their species, just the "normal" amount.
The same applies to stuff like a feral machamp, 4 arms would be normal there

Good point but multi_limb doesn't currently imply multifurry or multifur and it shouldn't exactly for your reasons.

should only be used in place of multifur:

Having more body-parts than usual. More-so than what would be considered 'normal' for that species or character.

which unfortunately contradicts itself right in the next sentence:

Note that a Cerberus, Hydra, or a Chimera, while expected to have extra heads, are still considered 'Multifurry'.

^^ makes no sense to me at all.

kalider said:
Good point but multi_limb doesn't currently imply multifurry or multifur and it shouldn't exactly for your reasons.

Yep, agreed

Note that a Cerberus, Hydra, or a Chimera, while expected to have extra heads, are still considered 'Multifurry'.

Cerberus, Hydra and mythological_chimeras "normally" already have multiple heads, so I agree they should not be tagged multfur.
Chimeras as in "creature made up of different parts of different species" don't have a standard number of limbs, so they shouldn't count either.

Hmm, looks like we treat multi_arm and multi_leg differently:
X_arms is for characters that have X arms, regardless if it's normal for the species or not.
X_legs is for characters that have X legs AND it's unusual for the species, if it's normal for the species there's Xped (ex. 8_legs vs octoped)

Which is kinda confusing... and probably a mess, because I'd wager most people posting spiders, pokémon with more legs or similar don't know the difference

shadyguy said:
Hmm, looks like we treat multi_arm and multi_leg differently:
X_arms is for characters that have X arms, regardless if it's normal for the species or not.
X_legs is for characters that have X legs AND it's unusual for the species, if it's normal for the species there's Xped (ex. 8_legs vs octoped)

Which is kinda confusing... and probably a mess, because I'd wager most people posting spiders, pokémon with more legs or similar don't know the difference

Yeah, I’ve run into this distinction before, and I don’t know what to make of it. It seems to follow the format of biped (note that 2_legs is aliased to invalid_tag for whatever reason) in the sense that anything that would normally walk on that number of legs gets the tag, regardless of how many legs they actually have. So a normally two-legged creature whose legs have been amputated, or whose legs are simply not visible in the image get the biped tag, and likewise for a quadruped whose legs have all been removed. However, in the latter case, you can still tag 4_legs when it’s not usual, ie. a normally 6-legged creature missing two of its legs, whereas it’s impossible to tag a quadruped missing two of its legs due to the 2_legs invalidation.

I assume this distinction only exists because we actually have these words in the English language for the number of legs a creature uses to move around on. It’s important to the layout of the creature’s body. For arms, however, nothing that has arms naturally has any number of arms other than two. Most creatures don’t have them at all.

Somewhat tangential, but I have to wonder how squidward tentacles would be tagged in this sense. He has four legs naturally, but he walks like a biped, not like a quadruped. In that sense, I think I can understand another reason to make this distinction. Biped, quadruped, octoped, etc. refer to the shape of the body in some sense more then the actual leg count. So, I guess squidward ought to be tagged biped + 4_legs since he has the bodily structure of a biped but with four legs. The number of arms, however, is fairly irrelevant to the shape of a character.
post #2912446

Perhaps the wiki should be updated to state that the *_legs tags can actually be used not just when the number of legs differs from what they would normally have, but when it differs from the number natural to their body shape. Though, this would imply a few things…
- anthro, human, and humanoid could simply imply biped at that point
- there would be no use for tags like uniped, triped, pentaped (unless starfish count?), or septaped, since nothing that actually exists have these numbers of legs, so we can’t say what body shape would be natural to them. hoothoot, for example, would have to be biped + 1_leg, since it looks like a bird, and birds naturally have two legs.
post #1487974
So, I’m not sure how well this would work out.

The tag alias multifurry -> multifur (forum #322828) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.