Example: https://e621.net/posts?tags=pink_panties+nude+-panties_around_one_leg+-panties_around_legs+-panties_around_ankles+-panties_around_ankle+-panties_down

Isn't this one not actually nude, but topless+pantsless?
post #2997149

I'm trying to figure out how to find panties laying on furniture/bed like that. Note: cub, casual_nudity
post #1371959

Not wanting to mess with these tags too much until I know WTH I'm doing. ;)

Already fixed a FNAF setfamily that some had both bra and panties on but were marked nude, which seems to go against Wiki definition. Used wardrobe_malfunction and nipple_slip tags because those are actually different but partially overlapping things, right? Also, did not know there was both a Toy Chica and Chica tag. TIL!
post #2925339

alphamule said: Isn't this one not actually nude, but topless+pantsless? post #2997149

Technically, but I would instead say panties_only, which will implicate topless appropriately. And yes, the nude tag should be removed. People tag it wrong (that is, against the e621 wiki standard) all the time, because in a lot of countries, it has different common usage.

alphamule said: I'm trying to figure out how to find panties laying on furniture/bed like that. Note: cub, casual_nudity post #1371959

The official place to ask "is there a tag for that" is forum #23085 Do we have a tag for that. I lurk there with a couple of others. More helpfully, you could try discarded_clothing, specifically discarded_panties.

That said, sometimes you're just going to be the first person to care about these things. I like to keep sets that may one day ascend to taghood: set:oral_condom_application set:depth_marks set:onepunchmanok set:vvsplit. On the post page, you can check "sets with this post" which is almost always pointless but I dream of one day connecting with a fellow set user.

alphamule said:

I'm trying to figure out how to find panties laying on furniture/bed like that. Note: cub, casual_nudity
post #1371959

Undertagged, but: https://e621.net/posts?tags=underwear+discarded_clothing

Even more undertagged:
https://e621.net/posts?tags=discarded_underwear
https://e621.net/posts?tags=discarded_panties

matrixmash said:
The official place to ask "is there a tag for that" is forum #23085. I lurk there with a couple of others. More helpfully, you could try discarded_clothing, specifically discarded_panties.

That leads to a specific post, not a forum. https://e621.net/forum_topics?search%5Bcategory_id%5D=10 was closest I could find in the list.

I'll use that discarded_panties tag, thanks!

Panties_only makes sense for him. I assume that it's implied to also have those other two tags? Panties_only implying no other clothes so topless+pantsless, right? Saw the topic with mention of bulge implication on junk under panties. Basically, the male version of camel_toe where you can see the scrotum/outer labia. The penis being visible is just extra... baggage (sorry, but had to use that joke, heh).

Hmm, I rely often on typing random related words, and using the resulting tags that it tries to suggest as a sort of thesaurus. Is it possible to have "discarded_*" show up for future taggers? I'm not sure how the automatic indexing works (is it automatic?). Often, the word I searched leads to implicated tags or similar spellings. Also, it fixes typos. Very, very rarely do I have to back out a tag because I accidentally created a new one with incorrect spelling! Typing 'panties' probably should cause "discarded_panties" to show up, is what I'm saying.

alphamule said: That leads to a specific post, not a forum. https://e621.net/forum_topics?search%5Bcategory_id%5D=10 was closest I could find in the list.

Durrr... That's what I get for being too clever. This is the link to the appropriate forum. Hopefully. I'm pretty sure.

alphamule said: I assume that it's implied to also have those other two tags? panties_only implying no other clothes so topless+pantsless, right?

You can see the implications for a tag on the bottom of its wiki page. In this case, it seems like pantsless is not implied, which, looking at the wiki page for pantsless, is intentional. "This tag should not be used together with topless" for some reason.

alphamule said: Hmm, I rely often on typing random related words, and using the resulting tags that it tries to suggest as a sort of thesaurus.

Same. I actually found discarded_panties by typing in reasonable phrases, like "draped_clothing", "panties_draped", and "clothing_on_floor", and stumbling into it. I think the indexing is automatic unlike aliases or implications. So there's no way to add a "suggested" tag. At least in the future, you can use the tag search: https://e621.net/tags For example, here is the list of *_panties, which is very unwieldy, and here is a complete list of extant disambiguation tags: The magnitude of our folly.

alphamule said:
Panties_only makes sense for him. I assume that it's implied to also have those other two tags? Panties_only implying no other clothes so topless+pantsless, right?

No, pantsless (and bottomless) imply that the other half of the clothing is present. The correct tags for panties_only are exactly as implied: topless + underwear_only.

(At some point, someone needs to sort out the mess in the shirtless tag, which was de-implicated from topless on the basis that not all topwear counts as a shirt, e.g. a bra. But right now it's almost exclusively images that should have been tagged topless instead. I'm gonna name and shame Millcore here in particular, who was the one who approved that particular unalias so should be well aware of its rationale.)

matrixmash said:
Durrr... That's what I get for being too clever. This is the link to the appropriate forum. Hopefully. I'm pretty sure.

For thread links, type topic #number instead of forum #number. In this instance, topic #23085.

matrixmash said:
You can see the implications for a tag on the bottom of its wiki page. In this case, it seems like pantsless is not implied, which, looking at the wiki page for pantsless, is intentional. "This tag should not be used together with topless" for some reason.

Because the correct tag for a character who is both pantsless and topless is underwear_only. topic #27786

Think of it this way: you wouldn't tag a nude character with both bottomless and topless. At least I hope you wouldn't.

wat8548 said:
Think of it this way: you wouldn't tag a nude character with both bottomless and topless. At least I hope you wouldn't.

LOL! Yeah, thanks for responses, everyone. I'm figuring it out as I go, even though I've been on and off this site for years.