The wiki description for bald says: "A character with no hair on their head.".

Fur is technically hair, but I'm going to assume it doesn't count for this case and that these images are bald:
post #3316966 post #3331263 post #3180012

But what about when the hair starts getting fluffier?
This is getting harder to tell the difference between hair and fur
post #3132039 post #3388185 post #2533341

Does it make sense to tag characters that don't usually have hair as bald?
You wouldn't expect a lizard or a robot to have hair - so why would it be tagged bald?
post #3373488 post #2427691 post #3386291 post #3364078

On the other hand, it's hard to find images of characters lacking hair without using the bald tag - scalie -hair still returns a lot of images with hair simply because hair is very often not tagged.

faucet said:
The wiki description for bald says: "A character with no hair on their head.".

Fur is technically hair, but I'm going to assume it doesn't count for this case and that these images are bald:
post #3316966 post #3331263 post #3180012

I would say those don't count for bald. Fur counts as covering, so it's not bald to have a normal pelt of fur on the head (you can actually have an otherwise fur-covered creature that has the fur shaved off of their head, making them bald in that case; fur-covered characters can also get bald spots by having patches of fur missing).

faucet said:
Does it make sense to tag characters that don't usually have hair as bald?
You wouldn't expect a lizard or a robot to have hair - so why would it be tagged bald?
post #3373488 post #2427691 post #3386291 post #3364078

Generally I'd only consider humans and human-like humanoids for the bald tag (or fur-covered animals that are lacking fur up there). Lizards/scalies, robots, and other such things I'd expect to be bald/without hair by default, so having posts like that flooding out the bald tag and making it difficult to find creatures that aren't expected to be bald but are, which would make the tag less useful.

I think whether or not a character counts as "bald" depends from person to person tbh.

post #3076051

I'm along the same lines. Just tag bald for species that could be expected to have hair, but don't.
And use non-mammal_hair for species that normally don't, but are drawn with hair anyway. More useful for searchability that way.

I feel it's fair to tag the furry characters as bad when there's no sign of it still being fur on top of their head, that is a thing people might look for. Balding can be used if the fur's actually falling out and shaved_head if it's shaved away..

furrin_gok said:
Balding can be used if the fur's actually falling out and shaved_head if it's shaved away..

Balding is only when there's a bald spot on their head, not if the scalp is completely bald. Balding is when it's in the process of becoming bald, but isn't completely. IMO, if it doesn't look like the top of the head is meant to be bald from a lack of fur/feathers, the lack of fur/feather definition in that particular area (e.g. a plain line without some head_tuft) doesn't mean there's a lack of fur/feathers, it's just minimal fur detail. For example,
post #3390031 post #1987683
are not bald.