Regarding r58995

There are two authors who use the name retsu, れつね and 歹刂, so I decided to specify it because I thought it was necessary.
I think this is desirable for determining the correct creator when manually adding creator tags in cases such as where they are listed on google spreadsheet as participants in a collaboration.
I don’t think the information in parentheses necessarily needs to be in Japanese, but I thought “retsu_(line_retsu)” was a bit redundant.

t51.2:

Restune only calls himself "Retsu" on Niconico, so specifying it is redundant.

And regardless, Retsu_(user/[ID)] would be a better specification for an English tag

t51.3:

For example, if a work is reuploaded on another platform by a third party, and that person has only seen the creator’s name on Niconico, it’s entirely possible that they would credit the creator as “retsu”.
You're right that Retsu_(user/ID) is better — that had slipped my mind. I had been thinking only about readability when adding it manually.

t51.3:

Another possibility is that れつね may have used the name “retsu” as their main handle in the past (although when I searched through their YouTube channel on the Internet Archive this time, the name used was “烈音”, but I don't know if that was the case on Twitter).
At the very least, when it’s unclear exactly who the “retsu” tag refers to, I think we should include additional information in parentheses, even if it seems redundant.
Furthermore, I believe that the “retsu” spelling used by 歹刂 is strictly for localization purposes, and I don’t think that name is used anywhere other than in the ID.