So, this piece just got an additional source via Twittter: https://e621.net/posts/3049589

The nude version, however, has not been posted on Twitter, but is linked on the clothed one's Twitter post. Should the nude version have the clothed one as a Twitter source?

On the one hand, since it's not the same version, I get not linking them since it's inaccurate. On the other, it would help the artist get more eyes on their work since the nude one has more upvotes, and the nude version isn't behind a paywall or anything similar anyways.

Just wanted to get some thoughts.

I'd personally only add sources that depict the image shown in the post for accuracy.

dogenzaka said:
I'd personally only add sources that depict the image shown in the post for accuracy.

A link to an image collage, if applicable, sounds pretty get here too.

if the source is a different version, instead of putting it in the source field I prefer to put it in the description as AVAS: source link after what ever the description is, with the inclussion of the avas tag. It's also easier to find the post someone is talking about this way as you don't need to click through multiple sources to find the avas in question.