The bulk update request #10169 is pending approval.

create implication interior_background (483) -> detailed_background (220022)
create implication inside_vehicle (5943) -> detailed_background (220022)

Reason: If you can determine the location type of a background, it fits the definition of detailed_background, "Any background detailed enough to place the scene in a clearly defined location."

For nature (and I imagine city) it's pretty possible to have backgrounds I wouldn't really call 'detailed' so much as themed or with a motif. A gradient with floating leaves or an abstract/simplified city skyline aren't exactly detailed. Here's a couple examples I found for 'nature_background':
post #5275903post #5237164

regsmutt said:
For nature (and I imagine city) it's pretty possible to have backgrounds I wouldn't really call 'detailed' so much as themed or with a motif. A gradient with floating leaves or an abstract/simplified city skyline aren't exactly detailed. Here's a couple examples I found for 'nature_background':
post #5275903post #5237164

I think the former should still count as a detailed background, but not the latter. I'll remove it from the BUR. (I feel like it should be restricted to detailed backgrounds, though; a redefinition may be in order.)

For city backgrounds, though, I would argue that even a simplified city skyline does count as a "clearly defined location".

beholding said:
I think the former should still count as a detailed background, but not the latter. I'll remove it from the BUR. (I feel like it should be restricted to detailed backgrounds, though; a redefinition may be in order.)

For city backgrounds, though, I would argue that even a simplified city skyline does count as a "clearly defined location".

Idk, I feel like these are really stretching both the idea of a clearly defined location and what people think of when they read 'detailed':
post #5183210post #4676298

I bring up that last bit because most people don't read wikis. If a name implies something different than how it's strictly defined on the wiki, and this is reflected in the use of the tags (which it appears to be! As a comparison, simple_background has a good number of examples of stuff that's roughly identifiable, but is rendered simplistically/abstractly. On the other hand detailed_background abstract_background has some examples of the opposite) one of them needs to change.

Bumping this to advertise that I've removed city_background from the implications. If that changes your opinion, please adjust your votes accordingly.

How is interior_background different than inside?

crocogator said:
How is interior_background different than inside?

Inside is from the viewpoint of the viewer. I could imagine interior_background applying to some images where the viewer is outside looking in, creating an interior_background from an outside viewpoint. The way it's currently used, though, does seem to be identical.