Implicating midriff → clothing
Link to implication

Reason:

The wiki says:

Images or animations that depict the character wearing clothing, but none of the clothing is covering their belly or upper hips

So... why isn't that tag implied?

EDIT: The tag implication midriff -> clothing (forum #252182) has been rejected by @NotMeNotYou.

Probably because of midriff nude.
Too many mistags to be viable for an implication, since that'd result in even more clean up.

FurryLover121 said:
Implicating midriff → clothing
Link to implication

Reason:

The wiki says:

Images or animations that depict the character wearing clothing, but none of the clothing is covering their belly or upper hips

So... why isn't that tag implied?

Probly just wasnt noticed sence it isnt really a priority thing.

But you are implicating the wrong term, should be clothed.

Clothes = clothing that just happens to be in the image, worn or not worn
Clothed = clothing that is specificly worn by a character.

clothing can only visibly have a midriff when it is worn.

Darou said:
So... why isn't that tag implied?

Probly just wasnt noticed sence it isnt really a priority thing.

But you are implicating the wrong term, should be clothed.

Clothes = clothing that just happens to be in the image, worn or not worn
Clothed = clothing that is specificly worn by a character.

clothing can only visibly have a midriff when it is worn.
[/quote]

Oh, you're right. Well... my bad, but you get the idea

The tag implication midriff -> clothing (forum #252182) has been rejected by @NotMeNotYou.