Implicating nude_cover -> nude.
Reason: From the tagwiki: The person is nude, however they are covering themselves.
Updated by sgcdonmai
Posted under General
The tag runs the gamut from people trying to cover themselves completely with their hands (post #548604), to using an object or article of clothing to cover the front (post #793896, post #709030, post #438135), to the barely clothed (post #700418, post #433282). I don't like an implication due to all the variables, but out of all of them, it's the latter example that puts me off the most.
The latter example should not even be tagged with this, as they are technically wearing clothing that just happens to cover very little. This type of garment would be better off with its own tag. nude cover ought to be reserved for cases where the character is actively covering their nudity, either with their hands or with an object or article of clothing.
As far as implication goes, I think the only borderline cases are ones where the subject is wearing something (a la naked x tags) but are covering themselves with it (post #280203, post #571547, post #265718). Towels seem fair game as long as they are covering themselves (not post #337952 and post #445417, which are covered by naked towel alone). According to the nude wiki these naked jacket posts fit the implication, but the naked towel posts may or may not. Certain naked bedsheet posts (post #446708, post #219431), however, I would not be comfortable having tagged with nude at all. Whether they're covering themselves or not, it just doesn't seem nude-worthy. Probably best to tag them as they're seen fit (post #758655, definitely).
Doesn't nude_cover mean that the character is actively covering himself/herself? They don't really do that in post #446708 since the blankets stay in place without their need to hold them in place.
Updated
Yeah, the tag could use some cleaning up. If we've reached an actual consensus on its use then it can be nipped off, perhaps with an added naked bedsheet tag. Even if they were actively covering themselves it wouldn't fit the definition of nude though.
I'll just go for naked sheet instead. They're similar enough, and they seem to be used interchangeably.
post #700418, post #433282 are definitely not nude_cover.
The other examples, yeah probably. They are nude in the sense that they are not wearing clothing. You don't need to see a lot of skin for nude to be correct.
I'm against an implication unless it's cleaned up first though. And it would need to be used properly afterward, only for characters that really are nude.
Obviously there's a bit of assumption required any time anything is covered because there could theoretically be clothing there. But I don't think that invalidates tagging them nude.
jxh2154 said:
post #700418, post #433282 are definitely not nude_cover.
What would you suggest for a tag then? "Naked apron" comes to mind, but it's obviously not an apron.
post #433282 is a surplice according to dq9 which I'm inclined to agree with. Now, if it's worth tagging or not, I can't imagine it is as there can't be that many priests let alone ones with suplice on here.
Looking through the priest_(dq3) tag, there seem to be about six images that are similar to post #433282:
post #341210
post #290316
post #286262
post #414554
post #353545
post #349715
I don't really have time to look for other priests or surplices.
I'm not talking about the surplice, which is the standard outfit for the DQ3 Priest. I'm talking about the surplice sans bodysuit. I guess a priest_(dq3) -bodysuit search gives decent results, but I feel that it, plus the Yakumo example above, should have something to describe it.
The Yakumo's clothing is named in this picture:
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/5536/1285686895861.jpg
I decipher チャイナ邵分, though 邵分 doesn't appear to be a word.
Anyway, this is something Chinese. Except for that "diagonal flap", it looks like a surplice (or tabard as I see it tagged 2 times), but it isn't one.
S1eth said:
The Yakumo's clothing is named in this picture:
http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/5536/1285686895861.jpg
I decipher チャイナ邵分, though 邵分 doesn't appear to be a word.
I think that's チャイナ部分.
