Topic: Tag Implication: Nipple -> Areola

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

wrong. and not just that, it is possible to draw nipples without drawing areolas. also its possible to draw areola without drawing nipple.

Updated by anonymous

purple.beastie said:
Nipples without areola
post #702568 post #703455

I really wouldn't count those as nipples to be honest. It's not done that way with genitalia, so why is it done that way with nipples?

Updated by anonymous

Tuvalu said:
I really wouldn't count those as nipples to be honest.

It is correct in the sense of following guidelines set by an admin. Parasprite added "or can be seen through (non-transparent) clothing." to the erect_nipples wiki in November of 2014. Erect_nipples implies nipples.

It's not done that way with genitalia, so why is it done that way with nipples?

Perhaps nipples should be unimplicated from erect_nipples?

In any case, there's probably some examples of nipples being shown uncovered without areola, but it was too much of a pain to find one. Nevermind, thought of one.
post #323815

Updated by anonymous

Tuvalu said:
I really wouldn't count those as nipples to be honest. It's not done that way with genitalia, so why is it done that way with nipples?

Those are just mistagged. They should have nipple_bulge instead.

Updated by anonymous

purple.beastie said:
It is correct in the sense of following guidelines set by an admin. Parasprite added "or can be seen through (non-transparent) clothing." to the erect_nipples wiki in November of 2014. Erect_nipples implies nipples.

I think that may have been before nipple_bulge started to gain traction. Either way I went ahead and revised the wiki to reflect how it's used now.

Updated by anonymous

  • 1