Implicating barely_visible_sheath → barely_visible_genitalia
Link to implication

Reason:

Ties it all together and saves on tagging

-1
Combined with the subtle_sheath thread and current tagging this results in barely_visible_genitalia on posts where all characters' genitalia is clearly visible, just because only a small section of the sheath itself is visible (spread around the base of a very visible penis.)

MagnusEffect said:
-1
Combined with the subtle_sheath thread and current tagging this results in barely_visible_genitalia on posts where all characters' genitalia is clearly visible, just because only a small section of the sheath itself is visible (spread around the base of a very visible penis.)

I see your point but it is only speaking of a single part of the genitalia being subtle, like having barely visible balls while an erection is fully visible, so these tags can be applied to a single character/post and similar tags have already been applied to many posts.

I interpret the barely_visible_genitalia wording to mean a character's genitalia as a whole, rather than every part individually.

The only place it notes that barely_visible_genitalia should be tagged alongside clearly visible genitalia is if there's a separate character whose genitalia is barely visible and not being interacted with.

LurkingLupinoyd said:
similar tags have already been applied to many posts.

95% of the tag (eg. fully-visible or featuring interaction) and wiki edits I disagree with around the barely_visible* and subtle* tags that I can find are by the same 3-4 users.

Hmm, so you'd rather it only applied to those posts where all parts are subtle or only one part can be barely seen and the rest are fully covered? Sounds like something that needs its own thread to be discussed.