Two tags that have the same definition, but half dressed seems to be the more popular tag.

Partially_clothed

-1

half_dressed is already an implication from both topless and bottomless, as the subject is quite literally half dressed.

A character could be wearing nothing but socks and a smile,
which would indicate partially_clothed, yet sure as hell not half_dressed.

Yeah, -1.

Partially clothed is for clothes that are pulled aside but still worn. Such as open shirts, lowered pants, etc. Whereas half_dressed is used when some clothing is entirely missing (bottomless/topless).

-1 for above reasons. Additionally, if this alias is denied, then perhaps partly_undressed and partially_dressed should be unaliased from half-dressed and instead aliased to partially_clothed.

An implication in opposite direction from original suggestion might be a good idea as well. An individual being half-dressed would imply that they are partially_clothed. ... Though, that wouldn't be a good implication if e621 specifically wants partially_clothed to mean only clothing still in some way on the body, but in process of removal or pushed aside from normal wear position - and not to mean some articles missing entirely.

Clearly defining these two beyond the single sentence in each one's wiki might be a good idea. There's likely a lot of crossover in the tagging on these by current definitions. (Don't have time to verify that at the moment.)

Summation of above:

• Add implication: half-dressed -> partially_clothed (Depending on how defined.)
• Remove alias: partly_undressed -> half-dressed
• Remove alias: partly_dressed -> half-dressed
• Add alias: partly_undressed -> partially_clothed
• Add alias: partly_dressed -> partially_clothed

Theses aren't tags I've played with much, so I certainly welcome input from others on why this approach would/wouldn't be a good idea.

Yeah, alias denied for the reasons already mentioned. It's a bit pedantic tagging-wise but they aren't actually the same thing.

I did however move partially_clothed implication from clothing to clothed, because that one was bugging me for a while now. I also deleted the fully_clothed to clothed alias and approved an implication because while it is vague what that exactly means, it's no less vague than partially_clothed in my eyes.

Genjar said:
Yeah, -1.

Partially clothed is for clothes that are pulled aside but still worn. Such as open shirts, lowered pants, etc. Whereas half_dressed is used when some clothing is entirely missing (bottomless/topless).

Just curious, I know you tag a lot of clothing-related things. What do you think about implicating some of the undressing-related tags (e.g., open_shirt) to partially_clothed?

Nyteshade said:

• Add implication: half-dressed -> partially_clothed (Depending on how defined.)
• Remove alias: partly_undressed -> half-dressed
• Remove alias: partly_dressed -> half-dressed
• Add alias: partly_undressed -> partially_clothed
• Add alias: partly_dressed -> partially_clothed

That's another idea. It sounds like partially_clothed has had kind of a confusing history and it would be nice to piece these all together.

parasprite said:
Just curious, I know you tag a lot of clothing-related things. What do you think about implicating some of the undressing-related tags (e.g., open_shirt) to partially_clothed?

I remember suggesting that ages ago. I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work, and it'd probably make the usage of partially_clothed more obvious.

The implication might work for a few other tags too: pants_down, panties_aside... And possibly raised_shirt.

There's also undressing, which would fit 99% under partially_clothed. But there's some images of someone simply unbuttoning their pants/shirt, so that wouldn't work. Could be implicated to clothed, though.

parasprite said:
I also deleted the fully_clothed to clothed alias

Excellent. That'll be handy for a few things... once it gets tagged.
But getting those tagged will be quite a project. I tried to get started, but instantly ran into a small snag:
post #665670

Anthros and their habit of walking around barefoot. Does it still count as fully clothed if they don't have footwear? Maybe it should depend on the foot type, since some types aren't suited for footwear anyway (such as hooves)? But that might make the usage too complicated...

Genjar said:
There's also undressing, which would fit 99% under partially_clothed. But there's some images of someone simply unbuttoning their pants/shirt, so that wouldn't work. Could be implicated to clothed, though.

And then there's characters taking of one layer of clothes, e.g. outerwear. Though not sure how common that is.

Genjar said:
Anthros and their habit of walking around barefoot. Does it still count as fully clothed if they don't have footwear? Maybe it should depend on the foot type, since some types aren't suited for footwear anyway (such as hooves)? But that might make the usage too complicated...

Would argue that fully_clothed should exclude footwear, almost all digitigrade anthros walk around barefoot.

Just to prove my point, on your left: a digitigrade, on the right: a plantigrade. Guess who's wearing shoes? Is the left only partially_clothed while the right is fully_clothed?:
post #621654
Seems slightly silly to make a hard distinction here, unless we want an almost_fully_clothed tag.

Technicalities aside, this pretty much summarizes my thoughts on this subject:

         __Top_|_Bottom_|_Tag_________

Clothed?|   -  |    -   | nude

Clothed?|  yes |    -   | bottomless

Clothed?|   -  |   yes  | topless

Clothed?|  yes |   yes  | fully_clothed

In other words, fully_clothed should probably inherit its meaning from bottomless/topless/nude for simplicity.

I don't know if this will work in practice, but it seems the simplest way to handle them (undressing will probably get in the way of this somewhat, but you get the idea)

Yep, that seems good.
...and the chart reminded me: fully_dressed should be aliased to fully_clothed.

I'll throw this out: there's also a mostly_nude tag for topless and bottomless but still has, for example, socks and a scarf. It's pretty unofficial though.

Genjar said:
Yep, that seems good.
...and the chart reminded me: fully_dressed should be aliased to fully_clothed.

Oh, right. >.>

*quietly fixes chart and approves alias*