nipple_slip means "partially seen nipples", NOT "nipples slipped out from somewhere".

umm, pretty sure you just contradicted yourself there, buddy...

whiteleatherloafers said:
umm, pretty sure you just contradicted yourself there, buddy...

Umm.... Nope.

The "nipples slipped out from somewhere" mentioned above means something like the situation of this girl's right nipple (bra pulled down ==> nipple exposed), which is NOT what "nipple_slip" defines (as that nipple can be observed completely).

That nipple_slip should renamed as nipple_partially_exposed if it doesn't meant nipple_slipped_out but nipple_partially_shown, it's counter-intuitive.

I think this can pass as nipple slip.

Also, did wardrobe_malfunction rules changed? A lot of images that used to be considered plain skirt_lift are now also tagged with the other.
post #837530
post #837500
post #836940
post #835068

dick_dickinson said:
Also, did wardrobe_malfunction rules changed? A lot of images that used to be considered plain skirt_lift are now also tagged with the other.
post #837530
post #837500
post #836940
post #835068

I believe these skirt-lifts are not intended, hence it's OK to tag that.

(Well, if (for those tail-skirt lift images) seems to be trying to seduce someone, then that's not accidental. But then, the term is defined as "usually accidental" instead of "always/must be", which means it's not that strict)

That's what I meant. Accidental skirt lifts used to be just skirt lifts. Even you didn't add wardrobe malfunction until a couple of days ago.

Innominate said:
That nipple_slip should renamed as nipple_partially_exposed if it doesn't meant nipple_slipped_out but nipple_partially_shown, it's counter-intuitive.

You are not entirely wrong, but we already have a tag for fully exposed nipple(s), which is nipples, there's no need of two tags for the same thing. Besides, nipple_slip is not actually incorrect, it means exactly that, a nipple slipping out, but ONLY when it's partially visible, otherwise, it's just nipples.

moonian said:
[...] But then, the term is defined as "usually accidental" [...]

dick_dickinson said:
That's what I meant. Accidental skirt lifts used to be just skirt lifts. Even you didn't add wardrobe malfunction until a couple of days ago.

Wardrobe_malfunction means exactly what the name implies, a garment that is not working as it should, being "defective". It's a malfunction in the garment itself (like in the example in the tag's description: "such as a bra snapping off"), not by external cause. Dick Dickinson, all the examples you provided are indeed NOT wardrobe malfunction (I already removed the tag), all of those skirt lifts are from external cause (not the garment's fault); just like in this Kantoku image: post #558290.

Moonian, that "usually accidental" means that a woman may intentionally let her garment malfunction to show off, but it still must be a malfunction in the garment itself, not from external cause.

Many tag descriptions in this site needs re-working.

Then over half of the posts tagged both with wardrobe_malfunction and skirt_lift are wrongly tagged.

The skirt_lift was a useless tag when the skirt was lifted but nothing to shown underneath it.

I agree that skirt_lift shouldn't be used so liberally.

Expectations: post #839032
Reality: post #839799

This is bullshit.

Edit.
Same with wet when the character only submerges a foot or both feet and otherwise completely dry.

dick_dickinson said:
Then over half of the posts tagged both with wardrobe_malfunction and skirt_lift are wrongly tagged.

Yes, indeed. People make much confusion with that tag.

dick_dickinson said:
Reality: post #839799

This is bullshit.

LOL, that's definitely not skirt lift, the skirt is only being slightly pulled sideways. You can remove the tag whenever you see it's clearly a mistake (I already did it). People in this site exaggerate a lot with this tag. A couple days ago I also saw an image tagged with skirt_lift when the girl was clearly only slightly pulling the dress' skirt sideways in courtship.

dick_dickinson said:
Edit.
Same with wet when the character only submerges a foot or both feet and otherwise completely dry.

These examples also doesn't qualify as being wet; submerging only one or both feet in water doesn't make a girl wet. Wait, I mean, wet with water, the body/hair. Not horny. LOL.