The bulk update request #11558 is pending approval.

change category dynamax (474) -> copyright
create implication dynamax (474) -> pokemon (561049)
create implication dynamax_pokemon (119) -> dynamax (474)
create implication dynamax_clouds (62) -> dynamax (474)
create implication gigantamax_pokemon (603) -> dynamax_pokemon (119)
create alias gigantamax_fakemon (3) -> fakemon (6182)

Reason: Dynamax (D-Max for brevity) is a trademarked term and is a mechanic of Pokemon.
Dynamax is the term for all things related to the mechanic
Dynamax has 3 very distinct dark-red clouds hovering around the affected character, typically above the head or orbiting a high body part like ears
All Gigantamax (G-Max) Pokemon are Dynamaxed Pokemon with a different appearance and a unique attack based on the species, and they follow the Mega_Evolution rule: Gigantamax_* Pokemon do not get tagged as their base form species.
For example: Gigantamax_Pikachu should never be tagged as Pikachu unless there is another Pikachu in the image who isn't G-Max (they can be Dynamaxed though)
Gigantamax_fakemon, I've come to realize, get the same treatment as fake mega evolutions, aliased to fakemon since even if it's based on a real Pokemon, this form is still fake/fan-made

I don't like the idea of using dynamax and gigantamax for things outside of Pokemon (non-Pokemon-related fakemon), especially if as you say, they're trademarked terms. It'd be like tagging legendary_pokemon on certain Digimon or Pal. gigantamax_fakemon should probably be aliased to fakemon instead.

gigantamax and dynamax should also remain separate for searchability reasons, even if one's technically a variant of the other. If someone wants to search for normal dynamax and gigantamax together, an implication would make such a search identical to searching just gigantamax. Similar to how we don't tag link for link_(wolf_form), since even though link_(wolf_form) is link, the two tags are used to mean distinct forms, a dynamax pikachu should be distinct from a gigantamax pikachu.

I also think dynamax, dynamax_pokemon, and dynamax_clouds don't have a meaningful difference. All normal dynamax does is make a character macro. It's the presence of dynamax_clouds that's signifies something being dynamax, so I don't see how one can be tagged without the other. The vast majority or dynamax characters are also pokemon, making dynamax_pokemon largely redundant. When there's a distinction to be made from an existing tag (e.g. a trainer being dynamaxed instead of a pokemon), it's usually best to tag the less usual case instead of the most common one.

nin10dope said:
This is incorrect. The Pokemon actually do not grow, it's just a visual projection.

There's no difference from a tagging perspective. If it looks macro, it's tagged macro.

nin10dope said:
Well no because people make fanmade Gigantamax forms for existing Pokemon, so it has a valid niche.

In such a case it would be identifiable as a pokemon, so gigantamax_pokemon would apply. See the fakemon wiki:

Fan-made species should be tagged simply as "fakémon" unless clearly based on official species.

(emphasis mine) For it to be a gigantamax form of an existing pokemon, like a fanmade gigantamax typhlosion for example, it would be identifiably based on typhlosion, making pokemon_(species)/gigantamax_pokemon valid. If it's not identifiable as based on some pokemon species, it wouldn't be taggable as pokemon, and with gigantamax being a trademarked part of the pokemon franchise, it couldn't apply any more than mega_evolution.

nin10dope said:
You can just search dynamax pikachu -gigantamax_pikachu or -gigantamax_pokemon too to separate them

That would exclude images that have both gigantamax and normal dynamax pikachu, excluding results that have a normal dynamax pikachu like you're searching for, and make it impossible to search for posts that have both gigantamax and normal dynamax forms of a pokemon together.

nin10dope said:
Except if there's no other characters/elements in the image for comparison, it would not be macro for that would be TWYK.

And they wouldn't be visibly dynamax if they're not visibly large, without the clouds or something.

nin10dope said:
You said there should be a distinction for non-gigantamax forms and I gave you the solution.

Not a good one. If I want to search for dynamax pikachu, it shouldn't exclude results that contain a dynamax pikachu just because it also has a gigantamax pikachu. Or if I want to search for a post that has both a dynamax and gigantamax pokemon, they need to be distinguishable or else it would it would be like searching for just gigantamax, or gigantamax and a normal pokemon.

nin10dope said:
I've already said the ways it can be depicted, so there is something even without the clouds and comparison. It's a very distinct look.

Can you give an example of a dynamax pokemon without clouds, and show how macro wouldn't apply?

nin10dope said:
You literally cut off the part of that response that answers your objections perfectly, so I'm not repeating myself here.

No you didn't. I want to search for dynamax pikachu for example, so I search dynamax_pokemon pikachu and currently I get 4 results, 3 with a dynamax pikachu; an acceptable 75% hit rate. Your implication would instead give these results, dropping the hit rate to 18.75% with a number of results like
post #3334471 post #2183681 post #2025212 post #5130973 post #2057949 post #2635411
Plenty of results without a dynamax pikachu, or even a dynamax pokemon, but plenty of normal pikachu with some gigantamax pokemon. You say to then exclude gigantamax_pokemon from the search, which would exclude posts that have a dynamax pikachu and some gigantamax pokemon together. If I wanted to search dynamax_pokemon gigantamax_pokemon, your implication would make that search identical to searching just gigantamax_pokemon, while a search for dynamax_pokemon would become equivalent to ~dynamax_pokemon ~gigantamax_pokemon. Your response doesn't address these problems, the implication gains us nothing but worsens and takes away otherwise valid search options.

You're getting caught in the weeds of a specific example instead of considering the main issue. I said dynamax and gigantamax should be kept distinguishable, as they are visually distinct (if technically related) things, so dynamax_pokemon should have separate criteria from gigantamax_pokemon when searching. Just as we don't have bird imply dinosaur, you wouldn't argue it should because it's technically correct and if you don't want modern birds when searching dinosaurs, just exclude bird when searching dinosaur (and you wouldn't tag modern bird species for dinosaurs). But that's not helpful, and creates more problems than it attempts to solve.

Edited the BUR for better understanding and an appropriate alias