Yo, seems we had a few separate minor shitstorms about this recently, so how about this:
Create a fourth category: Characters. Includes any artwork/CGs/drawings/paintings/you get the idea. There are no humans - real or fictional - left in General then, and real people are in People, making it all fairly easy to tell apart and separate.
The only issue I can see besides having to move all the stuff is overlap with Anime, but it seems to me like the general rule anyway is "Anime overrides everything else when applicable".
How does that sound? I tend to browse General mostly for landscapes/nature and such so I'd welcome this looking from that angle.
The point I'm getting at is that it seems like it would either be very subjective, or a lot of general and/or anime would need to be moved. I for one am fine with the three categories and I feel that adding a "character" category would be redundant and cause issues with how people want to tag their uploads.
We obviously have the 'People' category, where real people are sorted into.
A 'Character' category could thus contain fictional characters that are not of real people.
For instance, Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character, but the person playing the character in the TV-series Sherlock (i.e. Benedict Cumberbatch) is a real person, thus a photo of him belongs in the 'People' category even if he is (in said photo) portraying a fictional character.
However, I'm not sure if an additional main category is even necessary.
The point I'm getting at is that it seems like it would either be very subjective, or a lot of general and/or anime would need to be moved. I for one am fine with the three categories and I feel that adding a "character" category would be redundant and cause issues with how people want to tag their uploads.
I think you're making it a bit overcomplicated. Characters = any artwork of people that are not actual photographs. All of these besides the wolf (animal photo = General) are digital artwork, so they're easy to sort out.
We obviously have the 'People' category, where real people are sorted into.
A 'Character' category could thus contain fictional characters that are not of real people.
For instance, Sherlock Holmes is a fictional character, but the person playing the character in the TV-series Sherlock (i.e. Benedict Cumberbatch) is a real person, thus a photo of him belongs in the 'People' category even if he is (in said photo) portraying a fictional character.
However, I'm not sure if an additional main category is even necessary.
Maybe there is a better name for that. But basically, artwork of Sherlock = Character, photo of Benedict in the series = People.
I wouldn't say "necessary", but it does seem like it would sort out one of the most confusing dilemmas there are at the moment (I remember at the time I made this thread, there were like 2-3 ongoing debates about this).
What about "Landscape" or "Nature" as category?.
Simple and necessary.
That's another one I was always for, although that might be just slightly more ambiguous. (E.g. photo of a person taking 2% of an epic landscape = People or Landscape?)
