The tag implication #47457 crocs -> footwear has been approved.

Reason: According to wikipedia "Crocs, Inc. (stylized in all lowercase) is an American footwear company..."
Therefore, crocs are to be reasonably implied as footwear. As of now there are 112 posts with crocs, and 68 with crocs -footwear

There may be rare instances where the picture depicts crocs being used in other means other than footwear, like crocs in crocs -> post #2416634

But just like underwear is still considered underwear in underwear_removed ; underwear_on_head or underwear_on_floor despite not always being actively worn as an underwear should, similar tags could be created for crocs if it's ever needed.

EDIT: The tag implication crocs -> footwear (forum #350542) has been approved by @furrypickle.

m3g4p0n1 said:
There may be rare instances where the picture depicts crocs being used in other means other than footwear, like crocs in crocs -> post #2416634

True, but technically, crocodiles should at least be tagged as crocodilian anyway.

Would shoe be a more precise implication, or are crocs not regarded as shoes?

faucet said:
Would shoe be a more precise implication, or are crocs not regarded as shoes?

On my personal understanding, shoes are generic for "any kind of non-specific footwear", they fully enclose a character's feet. Crocs have a unique style, which someone might want to specifically search for some reason.
I think it's the same logic why:
> sandals aren't written as shoes on the wiki.
> flip flops aren't shoes, they're a type of sandals
> geta aren't shoes, but a unique japenese-style footwear

The tag implication crocs -> footwear (forum #350542) has been approved by @furrypickle.