create implication naked_babydoll -> babydoll
an naked babydoll is an babydoll.
EDIT: The tag implication naked_babydoll -> babydoll (forum #142421) has been rejected by @Oniichanyan.
Updated by DanbooruBot
Posted under Tags
create implication naked_babydoll -> babydoll
an naked babydoll is an babydoll.
EDIT: The tag implication naked_babydoll -> babydoll (forum #142421) has been rejected by @Oniichanyan.
Updated by DanbooruBot
The tag implication naked_babydoll -> babydoll (forum #142421) has been rejected by @Oniichanyan.
Why do we even have a naked_babydoll tag?
Can't it be covered by babydoll + no panties?
keonas said:
Why do we even have a naked_babydoll tag?
Can't it be covered by babydoll + no panties?
Or babydoll + bottomless, either way I agree that it should be nuked.
keonas said:
Why do we even have a naked_babydoll tag?
Can't it be covered by babydoll + no panties?
I'm surprised it still exists, actually. For some reason I thought it was already obliterated after topic #14249. +1 for purging the pointless tag.
Killed the tag and replaced it with babydoll + bottomless as @Unbreakable suggested. No panties doesn't really fit as per the definition of bottomless.
Moved some posts over to the camisole tag.
Should it be made a not to use tag?
Either that or alias it to babydoll like naked thighhighs, naked boots and naked randoseru before it.