Bottomless and topless used to be implicated to half-dressed, but looks like those implications got removed recently. Any particular reason why? From what I can see, those seem pretty valid, and I can't find any discussion about it on the forums.

Genjar said:
Bottomless and topless used to be implicated to half-dressed, but looks like those implications got removed recently. Any particular reason why? From what I can see, those seem pretty valid, and I can't find any discussion about it on the forums.

I've actually wondered about suggesting those for implication, they've been separate for awhile it seems like, long enough there's no record in the alias page for when it apparently happened. I didn't know they ever were implicated. Based on the wiki though, it seemed natural which is why I'd thought about suggesting them. Makes it even more strange if they used to be but aren't anymore.

If I were to guess, it might be because half-dressed is often used interchangeably with partially_clothed and even skimpy. Maybe it was causing problems with keeping bottomless and topless cleaned up and functional so they separated them to help reduce the problem?

At this point, trying to tell the difference between half-dressed and partially_clothed is bordering on impossible though. Which brings up another point: would it be worth the tagging project to clean up, or does topless/bottomless suffice for half-dressed (and is maybe even more specific about what is bare) and we should just alias away half-dressed to -> partially clothed?

furrypickle said:
I've actually wondered about suggesting those for implication, they've been separate for awhile it seems like, long enough there's no record in the alias page for when it apparently happened. I didn't know they ever were implicated. Based on the wiki though, it seemed natural which is why I'd thought about suggesting them. Makes it even more strange if they used to be but aren't anymore.

I... could've sworn that they've been implicated for as long as I can remember; but there should be more posts tagged as half-dressed, if those had actually been implicated until recently.

Did I only imagine it? Might be that I'm so used to tagging both on same images, that I never noticed that they aren't. :/

At this point, trying to tell the difference between half-dressed and partially_clothed is bordering on impossible though. Which brings up another point: would it be worth the tagging project to clean up, or does topless/bottomless suffice for half-dressed (and is maybe even more specific about what is bare) and we should just alias away half-dressed to -> partially clothed?

You brought up some very goods points, and I feel that those tags should be either cleaned up, or re-organized.

Here's how I see them:
partially_clothed: Supposed to be used for clothes that are pulled aside or partially removed, but as you said, it often gets confused with half-dressed and skimpy. Would be an useful tag... if we could sort it out. Tags such as open_shirt and panties_down should probably be implicated to it.

half-dressed: Wiki says to tag it for characters that are literally half-dressed: topless or bottomless. We could implicate those two tags to it. But is half-dressed actually an useful tag? It seems oddly specific to me. I'd imagine that most users would just want to search for one or the other, instead of 'either bottomless or topless'. Aliasing it away to partially_clothed seems like good idea, especially since those are already mixed up so often.

clothed: Used to be sort of a fully_clothed tag, but got changed into an umbrella tag for characters that are wearing anything at all. Ranging from skimpy to fully clothed. Which leaves us with no tag for fully clothed, plus it's current use seems redundant with '-nude'. Dunno how to fix that, though.

But there are instances in which "bottomless" is fully dressed for a character, such as Donald Duck, among others.

Genjar said:
Here's how I see them:
partially_clothed: Supposed to be used for clothes that are pulled aside or partially removed, but as you said, it often gets confused with half-dressed and skimpy. Would be an useful tag... if we could sort it out. Tags such as open_shirt and panties_down should probably be implicated to it.

Wouldn't that also imply that undressing would be partially_clothed as well? Since in order to be undressing, clothes must be coming off, thus making the character partially_clothed, and/or naked?

Standard clothing for a character missing an obvious piece of clothing should not, IMO, count as actually fully dressed. With your example of Donald, he's dressed in more than a few outfits where he has worn bottoms or the outfit is a complete one-piece, such as a bathing suit. It doesn't matter if it's a natural state for the character, what matters is the human societal standard of clothing- He is wearing only a shirt, and thus, not fully dressed.

Moon_Moon said:
But there are instances in which "bottomless" is fully dressed for a character, such as Donald Duck, among others.

I'm along the same lines as 123easy. Bottomless never counts as fully clothed. 'course, that's bit moot as long as we don't have any tag for fully dressed.

Wouldn't that also imply that undressing would be partially_clothed as well? Since in order to be undressing, clothes must be coming off, thus making the character partially_clothed, and/or naked?

Is it possible to tag a character as both undressing and nude? I don't think so, unless it's a comic or a sequence. If there are just clothes lying around, then it should be tagged as clothing instead of undressing. So I think we could implicate undressing to partially_clothed.

Sorry to post on a three month old thread but I was wondering if a decision was ever made on this as I was just about to suggest these implications.

Also, I've had a look at the following thread which also seemed to have varied opinions on the matter: https://e621.net/forum/show/53970