Implicating skimpy → clothed
Link to implication

Reason:

From skimpy wiki:

Images or Animations in which characters are dressed in clothing that is notably tight, revealing (Ex. Midriff, Cleavage), suggestive, or otherwise accentuating a character's sexual proclivity.

what if what they're wearing isnt clothes, but like, a ribbon or some twigs or something

Seems the wiki needs to be changed, as they dont always wear clothes.

ippiki_ookami said:
what if what they're wearing isnt clothes, but like, a ribbon or some twigs or something

Sounds to me like that can't be properly called dressing skimpily. Skimpy dressing is dressing in provocatively small and/or tight clothing that still is legally acceptable as covering oneself for purposes of nudity laws, where applicable. If a bra or top just barely conceals the nips (most undereboob shots) or a thong barely conceals the genitals, then that's skimpily dressed. The same goes for wearing really tight swimsuits that cling to the outline (guys, herms, dickgirls in banana hammocks where the sheath or cock bulge is outlined, camel toes) or barely cover anything inthe first place (Daisy dukes). Hope this helps.

What exactly is the difference between clothed and -nude, anyway? It seems a bit redundant to me, in its current definition.

ippiki_ookami said:
what if what they're wearing isnt clothes, but like, a ribbon or some twigs or something

Then skimpy wiki needs changes, or the picture don't get skimpy tag.

Genjar said:
What exactly is the difference between clothed and -nude, anyway? It seems a bit redundant to me, in its current definition.

There was this post, but I'm not sure whether it's still valid. There's nothing about it in wiki.