Species Listing

@CruFox  
Ye, pheasant family. I learned this mostly because you know, peacock :P
 
but galliformes or landfowl are probably good.
 
There’s not really a good one for seals, unless we use ‘true seal’ for the uhh not walruse/sealions. Its kinda seals all the way up til they lose distinction.
 
We could call em pinnipeds, though we’re trying to avoid latin names so…/shrug. No good solution.

@Gyro  
According to Wikipedia, “peacock” is not the species name, it’s just the name for males. The species (or rather - common name for species from two genera) is called “peafowl” :P

@CruFox  
Yes, this is true :P the peahens are not nearly s pretty. Probably should change peacock if we wanna be correct, but everyone knows em as peacocks commonly. it should defintely alias at least. Funny thing is, in the fandom, peahens also tend to have trains :B
 
Also bees could be moved up to Apoidea, though there is no common name for wasp + bees. But then again, mustelids is also latin, so we have some here.
 
EDIT: Also I think we can trust bulbapedia since thats the basic consensus that the pokemon fandom has converged on. I think its fair to maybe just set a policy that is using that as a basis for species classification. While some of them are ambiguous, most of them are not.
 
Actually if we do that Lightning will be able to shut down debates. I think that solves their major issue!

Orangutan and chimpanzee should be species tags and also imply ape. Also ape should probably imply primate.

so, what i’m seeing is adding real life species implications to pokemon is too subjective, to you charizard is a dragon but he’s not even a dragon type according to game freak. sudowoodo may look and act like a tree but you figure out in game it isn’t. so adding these kind of implications will be biased from whoever suggests them.
 
here’s 2 completely non-objective implication sets to add to pokemon: add their typing, and add their egg group. it may suck when pokemon lose a type when evolving / mega’ing, but these are official.
 
Charizard -> fire type pokemon, flying type pokemon, monster egg group, dragon egg group

@Anonymous #F6D9  

 
This is not Pokebooru :P I think settling on just mammal, bird, repitle, etc. is enough.

I agree with Gyro :P It’s very easy to do -(pokemon name) if you don’t want to see it, and it’s easy to remove implied tags if they don’t fit. Personally, if I’m searching for pictures of foxes, I want to see all pictures of foxes, including fictional fox species like Ninetales and Fennekin.
 
And like it was stated, it’s a lot easier for someone to remove “pokemon” from their search than for someone looking for birds to have to add “OR (bird pokemon) OR (another bird pokemon)”, so on, for each bird pokemon xP
 
(Also I’m pretty sure Charizard isn’t a dragon type because dragon was insanely overpowered in gen 1 :P. Mega Charizard X is dragon type.)

@CruFox  
Ya, I’m gonna click on decline on egg groups and type as well. I dont think either of those are particularly useful for searching out different pokemon. They only sometimes make sense. Insert dragon exeggutor.
 
I’m still gonna point to bulbapedia as a source for deciding what species, as an independent 3rd party. That way both sides can go, see this should be X, or mods can go, it says its a Y and we’re going with that.
 
That said, I think you really miss out, with turtles, snakes, crocodillians, canines, felines, seals, etc. Those feel kinda odd not to tag, because they fit in many cases.

@Anonymous #F6D9  
non-subjective*
 
 
@dream  
again, it’s not being said they won’t be tagged, just that it won’t be an implication. you are still free to add the fitting tags on an image. this is the same reason reason even twilight sparkle doesn’t imply alicorn when she can often be drawn as a unicorn or even as a human.  
it’s better to be missing a few correct tags than to have incorrect tags on images

@Anonymous #F6D9  
Yeah, I think not implicating is fine. I’m just a bit unsure as to the responses in this thread as some seem to imply that a normal, non-hunanized / species-swapped Fennekin (for example) shouldn’t be tagged as fox and fennec despite being based on a fennec fox and resembling one in every way.
 
I think I’m just a bit confused by all the responses.
 
Also I agree with Gyro just on using Bulbapedia when it comes to what tags to add (on a case by case basis, not as implications)

@dream
 
@Anonymous #F6D9  
I think you guys are missing something here with not adding implications. By not adding implications, you ensure that tags that should be applied will be missed and not applied. Anyone who will see it already will see it cause they’re watching pidgey or watching pokemon and wont think to check wether bird is applied.
 
Anyone who’s watching bird will never see the image because they dont have the opportunity. Too many implications is a better position than too few, because more eyes will be on an image to have it rmeoved.

RE: Adding tags versus implicating tags  
There are other cases here on furbooru where species tags are implied despite not being applicable in 100% of cases. ‘unicorn’ and ‘pegasus’ both imply ‘pony’, despite the fact that not all unicorns and pegasi on furbooru are MLP-based or inspired, because the vast majority of them are. As I understand it, site policy is just to remove the non-applicable tag or tags after the fact. The argument is that this general rule should apply to Pokémon as well, for the reasons Gyro’s stating among others.
 
Leaving it up to the users to add species tags beyond just the Pokémon’s species name is, in my opinion at least, going to lead to inconsistent tagging of species among Pokémon (and other similar franchise species, such as Digimon etc). If the tags are going to be consistently applied, then either there needs to be an implication, or people will have to go around manually adding the tag to all the pictures where the uploader forgot or didn’t think to tag ‘bird’, ‘mammal’ etc. It seems to me that it would be less work to figure out what tags apply in what cases now, and remove them on humanised Pokémon images.
 
And yes, people are probably going to bring up whether or not [x] Pokémon should be [y] species in the future. Somebody’s going to claim that Eevee should get ‘vulpine’ or ‘feline’ or both or neither, regardless of what’s decided here. And that’s sort of the point; it’s happening regardless. If there’s no decision here, it’s going to be a bit of a free for all; the people who do think to tag real life species on Pokémon images aren’t all going to have the same ideas. There may well be a bunch of Eevee pics tagged ‘vulpine’ and another bunch tagged ‘feline’ or ‘canine’ or what have you. Figure out what they should get now, and at least there’s a precedent for tag maintenance in the future.

donkey should imply equine
 
Also if we’re keeping IRL hybrids as species, mule should probably imply equine and horse, donkey, hybrid

@DoesNotExist  
I already figured it out months ago, don’t make them imply things. A simple solution and eliminates all this bullshit arguing, subjectivity, and what not.
 
No you won’t be able to find all eevee when looking for mammals, so what. What if I wanna call vaporeon a fish but no one else does? Fuck me, gotta do what everyone else agreed to.
 
 
@Gyro  
What is the reason is that we don’t WANT implicatipons? Maybe not everyone even wants this shit. Did you ever think about that, or did you only think about yourself? If your answer is just “well you can minus out pokemon from a search” and guess what, YOU can add in pokemon to a search. it goes both ways and yours’ isn’t magically better just because its yours’.
 
@Gyro  
Undertagging is better in THIS instance as it leads to less confusion and argumemnts. You just cannot seem to grasp this.
 
And underlings? Slippery slope? Why are you acting like that? A pokemon is a pokemon, not tagging Snivy as reptile isn’t gonna make it magically harder to find. You want to find pokemon by searching basic things, okay, I don’t want to find them. Who is more right or wrong? You, apparently, according to you, certainly not me, certainly I have no good ideas at all and we have to do things your way no matter what because it’s what you prefer and want.

My father owns Nintendo and he says that pokemons should be tagged by species

Okay but like…
 

 

@LightningBolt  

 
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. Are you saying it’s bad that you’d have to do what everyone else agreed to and not call vaporeon a fish? Or are you thinking that we should go with the majority opinion and believe the majority is on your side? I really don’t know.
 
 
@LightningBolt  

 
If somebody wants to filter out every single Pokémon from a search or a filter, they just have to minus ‘pokémon’. If somebody wants to include all reptilian pokémon or bird pokémon in a watch or search, and the relevant Pokémon don’t have these tags, you have to include each of the specific species themselves into the search. One of these is much harder and more annoying than the other.
 

 
@LightningBolt  

 
Sure, you can find Snivy by searching ‘snivy’. You can’t find all the snake Pokémon by searching ‘pokémon, snake’. You say you don’t want to find Pokémon by searching basic things? Why not? I do. That’s two people here who would want to compared to one who wouldn’t. Does your opinion on this sort of thing just straight up overrule us because you’d a mod? I would have thought searchability of the site would be better tuned to the desires of a majority users rather than a few mods, and the desires of people who want to be able to find things rather than those who don’t.
 
Your simple solution isn’t going to eliminate the subjectivity, because if people are just going to tag Pokémon what they want, then the tags are filled with inconsistent subjectivity. Here’s a neat example; currently, the donkey tag has 18 entries. It does not imply equine. There are three images on the tag that have ‘equine’ and two of them have ponies in them, which themselves imply equine . This is a small dataset, I grant you, but it’s a snapshot of how tagging without implications can go.

@DoesNotExist  
Three people is not a very large pool to go off of for opinions. Two agree, one doesn’t. Democracy!

Eeeeh I’m gonna stay out of this now, I said my opinion and I don’t want to get into a fight ;^^ Whatever you guys decide is okay with me

synth - original species by vader-san

@dream  

 
Since this got buried

gatox -> gator and fox hybrid

@corposim  
Were not really giving hybrids their own species tag.

linoone -> pokemon

Short descriptions:
 
alien - Extraterrestrials; i.e. not of this Earth.  
experiment (lilo & stitch) - The pudgy-limbed artificial alien lifeforms of Disney’s Lilo & Stitch franchise.  
plorgonarian - One-eyed, two-tongued, three-legged aliens with an antenna on their heads in Disney’s Lilo & Stitch franchise.  
kweltikwan - Rotund, four-eyed, purple-skinned aliens in Disney’s Lilo & Stitch franchise.  
xenomorph - The primal, predatory, long-headed monstrosities that are the titular antagonists of the Alien franchise.