clone wiki: Two or more instances of the same character in the same scene.

dual_persona: For pictures of the same character twice in the same picture depicting multiple personae. For more than two personae in one image, see multiple_persona.

I'd suggest an alias, but clone has both dual_persona and multiple_persona images. It could be split up and then aliased to one of them, or it could be made into an umbrella tag for dual_persona and multiple_persona.

My understanding is that dual_persona and multiple_persona is used in cases where the alternate persona exists in canon, such as the case with Kozue in Mahoraba (post #4974), whereas clones are just copies of a character for no reason other than at an artist's whim (post #582174). So no, I don't think there should be an alias.

I'm against an alias. Clone and persona are distinct concepts. For example, Puru Two is a clone of Elpeo Puru. It would be wrong to say that Puru Two is a persona of Puru. Likewise, if different personas of Puru were displayed, it would wrong to call those personas her clones.

They're really distinct concepts, though I could get how it may be confusing when there's no canon explanation to use. Frankly, I wouldn't consider clone unless it's very clear that they are one (like a cloning lab being shown, stated by the author or the original story's canon, etc.). I think of dual/multiple persona as the more general tag for the situation but still separate from clone.

Mysteria & reese's definitions aren't even close to each other and neither one matches the wiki definitions.

Mysteria: clone is for random copies
reese: *_persona is for random copies, clone is for actual clones

edit: EB posted before I finished. ^^
@EB: in that case, most of the clone images need to be changed to dual_persona or multiple_persona

I think I'll refine what I said further, by noting this:

Persona should be used in cases of split personalities, or images showing a person at different time periods (alice_margatroid and alice_margatroid_(young), for example).

Clones should be used in cases where an exact physical copy of a character exists at the same time.

Of course, there's bound to be blurred lines, where a persona actually manifests itself, for example. But I'd still consider that a dual persona. Just my opinion though.

Mysterio006 said:
Persona should be used in cases of split personalities, or images showing a person at different time periods (alice_margatroid and alice_margatroid_(young), for example).

That's what time paradox is for.

To expand on what I said, look at post #62162 and post #787494. These two posts are clear examples of clone vs. *_persona. Only difference between most clone posts is that the clones of Puru are named (or numbered if you will). post #548539 is an example of the dual persona found in two characters.

clone: exactly the same
dual_persona: same character, different looks/personality
is the status quo
dual_persona of an old and young version of a character also gets time_paradox.
Whether different clothes are enough for dual_persona... not for me.

Although you might sometimes think that "it makes sense for the clone to be younger".

reese said:
That's what time paradox is for.

time_paradox is not mutually exclusive with dual/multiple persona. They should both be tagged when there are multiple versions of the same character from different ages.

Clone is distinct from the persona tags or time paradox so I don't want to alias it.

Should clone be used in conjunction with the *_persona tags?

I think clone is for images where they look the same, and *_persona for images where different types of the character are depicted.

I think there could be some gray areas where both a *_persona and a clone tag would be applicable, so I don't think they'll be truly mutually exclusive.

alegria said: Should clone be used in conjunction with the *_persona tags?

Only if it fits both criteria somehow, or as NWF said if it's just ambiguous. Better to use both rather than neither in that case.

Ok, I edited the wiki entries for clone, dual_persona and multiple_persona.

Clone wiki says

Two or more instances of the same character in the same scene. The instances should be completely identical and wearing the same outfit.

Is that really a necessary requirement? Something about that part of the entry bugs me.

There seems to be something of a consensus that clone = exactly the same. At least, no one's argued against it for several posts. If they're wearing different clothes, they're not exactly the same, so they're different personae.

Though come to think of it, "multiple copies that are exactly the same" and "actual clones" should probably be different tags. "Actual clones" is relationship meta-knowledge like brothers.

Sorry for raising the topic again, but should this really be tagged as dual-persona? post #783010
Sure it's depicting the same character, but they're not meant to be one and same character.

Nials said:
Sorry for raising the topic again, but should this really be tagged as dual-persona? post #783010

You're right. They're separate characters, so it's not dual persona.

Multiple_Persona = see split personality

Dual_Persona = I.E they might have a secret identity like superman and Clark Kent. (both being shown next to each other in the same image)

Clone = the same character having been... cloned. I.E it has NOTHING to do with either Dual_persona or Multiple_persona.