Wet_t-shirt should imply wet_clothing. I've noticed a few images tagged as both, but one really implies the other. Not sure whether wet_t-shirt implies translucent though.

Clothing, to me, means the whole ensemble (shirt, pants, shoes, etc.). So no, I don't think 'wet_t-shirt' should imply wet_clothing at all. Maybe the other way around, but not this way.

Well what else is wet_clothing going to find much use for? Only thing I have with this is it's really not used much

Rainbow_Dash said:
Well what else is wet_clothing going to find much use for? Only thing I have with this is it's really not used much

For when there's multiple pieces of wet clothing, instead of when there's just a wet t-shirt? I'm not saying we should stop using either tag, but having t-shirt imply wet clothes is just inaccurate.

Well a wet t-shirt is a wet piece of clothing, and if I don't implicate it (as in just have it so that it has to be all the clothing that's wet) then these tags won't take off very well

But if it's just a wet t-shirt, then wet_clothing becomes a redundant tag. It's like having a yellow tag and then yellow_fur attached to the same image. The yellow_fur is all that's needed.

You can't make tags 'take off', they need to rely on having images to associate them with. This is just forcing tags on an image to increase the amount of images that are using that tag.