HNTI said:
post #786359
Weird anatomy aside, what is visible of her hips appears to be too much to call loli.
Posted under General
HNTI said:
post #786359
Weird anatomy aside, what is visible of her hips appears to be too much to call loli.
It's not my upload, but their young appearance stroke me at first glance.
and mine :
post #787995
Updated by HNTI
Majority of the girls in the pic are quite busty except one...and what's more she has exposed pussy.
HNTI said:
post #788521Majority of the girls in the pic are quite busty except one...and what's more she has exposed pussy.
I'd say Illya is definitely not loli there.
post #692691: Looks like it at that angle, at least.
post #787995: The hips are there, but the head size to torso and limb size ratio is pretty off. I'd say to leave it off, but if someone comes along and tags it, I wouldn't object to it.
post #788306: Honestly, the only thing in this one that suggests loli to me is the flat chest, and that doesn't count for much. Removed.
post #788521: Agreed with jxh. Also, what the hell kind of color is that for nipples?
post #350704 - I don't think there's enough sexual emphasis on the young girl to count as loli.
HNTI said:
post #791023
Eh, nah.
HNTI said:
post #791698
The only part of her figure visible under that bulky clothing is the flat chest, which isn't (by itself) a determining factor. So, no.
Is post #792081 really loli-worthy? I mean, its child post certainly is, but I don't think that means it necessarily should automatically get the loli tag.
post #798594, definitely does apply.
post #797201 is so close on the borderline that even I can't tell. Might be best to err on the side of caution and tag it; anyone else wanna chime in?
The artist himself classifies it as loli, so let's go with that.
Had a hard time checking the tags on pixiv due to the source link returning a "file deleted" error.