Posted under Tags
remove alias erect_nipple -> covered_nipple
remove alias erect_nipples -> covered_nipple
Erect_nipple implies arousal/cold, and has no bearing whatsoever on whether the nipple in question is covered or not.
EDIT: This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 60 days.
EDIT: The bulk update request #998 (forum #123895) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
Updated by DanbooruBot
I believe the tag you're looking for is covered nipples. And a few other topics for reference:
-1 on this
Having read through the discussions, there would appear to be a simple error.
While it is true that both erect_nipple and covered_nipple both suggest the existence of a 'nipple', the reverse is definitely not true.
For example: 'erection' implies 'penis'. But just because there is a penis, that does not imply 'erection'. This would not be a case where alias could be used, as alias means the implication applies both ways.
For the complaint that covered_nipple and erect_nipple suggest the same thing, clearly, they do not. An erect_nipple would imply either cold or arousal in the subject so that the nipple is standing out from the flesh o the breast around it, while a covered nipple is a nipple that has something hiding it from direct view.
Just because a few covered_nipple images also happen to require erect_nipple does not make them identical in any way.
In this case, there is no implied tag that both give, but rather that an erect_nipple always implies 'nipple' due to visibility, while covered_nipple does not: it is possible for a covered_nipple to also require a 'nipple' tag as well, but not in all situations.
I think the problem stems from the fact that it's not easy to tell if a nipple is erect or not -- it stems subjectivity. What makes a nipple look erect aside from the artist outright telling us? The only way you can confidently tell if a nipple is erect is if its under clothing. If it turns out that such a tag like erect nipples was used incorrectly in entries with bare breasts, it's a constant judgment call by tag gardeners to decide whether such a nipple looks erect or that's just its' natural non-erect disposition. It can vary from artist to artist.
And it would really be of questionable use if we had separate erect nipples and covered nipples tags. Tags are partly descriptive about the nature of an image, but erect nipples barely gives us anything more than what nipples already offers.
Hmm. Then how would one indicate a nipple which does stand out from the breast in comparison to one that doesn't? It is definitely worth finding a tag/tags for which are definative, but if not erect_nipple, what would fit better?
Stand_out_nipple, perhaps? Bit wordy, but it does say exactly what it means, implies 'nipple' and applies whether the nipple is directly visible or not. Just not sure it actually offers much more definitive a tag than erect_nipple does.
The bulk update request #998 (forum #123895) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
