How do I tag this?

Zara said:

I Read the story 3 times already, and theres literally nothing that implies they are in a relationship like that, Yuel even thinks that she found a boyfriend for herself and she was gonna cease to be her best friend, your argument is invaild.

I'm talking about the Fate Episode and the CG art when i say "both of them", not the story. My argument is still valid.

Sekisei said:

I'm talking about the Fate Episode and the CG art when i say "both of them", not the story. My argument is still valid.

The fate episode is the story im talking about. They dont show that kind of affection to each other. Do you even play gbf? Theres literally no romance in that fate episode. I Have the swimsuit yuel myself too, and i just read it for the 4th time.

Danbooru uses a "tag what you see" policy, regardless of whatever the story may be. In the case of post #3448975, this looks like yuri, so that's what it's tagged as.

Zara said:

...its just not right to tag an official CG of the game based on the art only.

The only way to tag something is on the art alone. Our rule is to tag what you see.

Whatever their canonical relationship is, all that really matters here is what the the image implies.

Zara said:

The fate episode is the story im talking about. They dont show that kind of affection to each other. Do you even play gbf?

I've already talked about that and added a video to show it, whenever i play gbf or not is off-topic. Anyway, a mod posted a comment to address the problem:

RaisingK said:

Canon and official art don't matter. Tag what you see. This image looks like yuri, so it's yuri.

Cool it.

BarefeetChaser said:

Might not be very relevant because the post count is very small...but screw it I'm asking anyway.

How do you call this "Lilith holding" pose?
post #2557172
post #978441
post #383019
post #266414
post #55826
post #198634
post #335790
post #316791
post #1300221

So, uh, how exactly do you tag this pose? Come again?

@BarefeetChaser Those examples aren't even all the same pose, so I don't think there's a single generalized answer to your question. Compare post #55826 (standing straight up, hands at waist level) with post #2557172 (sitting, hunched over, hands up to the face). Then there's the arms spread, dual-wielding pose in post #1300221 which looks nothing at all like any of the rest.

If you want a tag for the gesture in post #55826 with palms up and hands apart, there are some examples of this being tagged open_hands -- post #3088064, post #3090157, post #3422368, etc. -- but the tag is undefined and used for a variety of poses, so it may require cleanup. Or maybe we need a new tag, like open_cupped_hands or something like that.

If that isn't what you were looking for, you may want to rephrase your question to be more specific, because I'm not exactly sure what you want at this point.

There's cupping_hands.

It has no wiki, though.

yelite said:

There's cupping_hands.

It has no wiki, though.

The phrase "cupped hands" is usually used for hands touching one another, though. See Google Images. At least that's my take on the tag.

iridescent_slime said:

If you want a tag for the gesture in post #55826 with palms up and hands apart, there are some examples of this being tagged open_hands -- post #3088064, post #3090157, post #3422368, etc. -- but the tag is undefined and used for a variety of poses, so it may require cleanup. Or maybe we need a new tag, like open_cupped_hands or something like that.

If that isn't what you were looking for, you may want to rephrase your question to be more specific, because I'm not exactly sure what you want at this point.

I think you pretty much got the idea. It's a pose rather specific to lilith_(ayanami_rei) and its parodies.
So thanks for the help, maybe a specific tag is needed.

post #3473337

This clothing looks like some kind of japanese_clothes, but I don't know exactly what (if at all).

ygm_1 said:

post #3473337

This clothing looks like some kind of japanese_clothes, but I don't know exactly what (if at all).

I'd say it's a short_kimono with sleeves held by a tasuki

Term for the bag in post #3473506?
I tried fanny pack but the wiki's description don't really fit here.

Lacrimosa said:

Term for the bag in post #3473506?
I tried fanny pack but the wiki's description don't really fit here.

We either update the wiki to reflect the fanny pack across the chest trend, or we make up a new tag like cross-chest fanny pack or chest bag or something.

Should post #3473649 be tagged phantom of the opera for the iconic half-mask?

post #3473897
Why was it set to rating:q? I can't see fall within any criteria in the howto:rate page that would qualify it as an q-rated image.

741qwe852asd963zxc said:

post #3473897
Why was it set to rating:q? I can't see fall within any criteria in the howto:rate page that would qualify it as an q-rated image.

Because it is tagged as loli, which is always questionabel or explicit, I would say
(Don´t have a gold account, so I can´t see the image)

741qwe852asd963zxc said:

post #3473897
Why was it set to rating:q? I can't see fall within any criteria in the howto:rate page that would qualify it as an q-rated image.

It's a nude, not particularly covered girl, that kind of thing tends to be rated as questionable.

Guaro1238 said:

Because it is tagged as loli, which is always questionabel or explicit, I would say
(Don´t have a gold account, so I can´t see the image)

You can look at the twitter source for the image. And yeah, I'd say a between the fact she's fully nude, looking at you, and blushing, it's at least questionable, and one would need to be quite desensitized to nudity to not notice it.

What I'm not sure about is the loli tag. I'm sure there are younger looking pictures untagged.

Guaro1238 said:

Because it is tagged as loli, which is always questionabel or explicit, I would say
(Don´t have a gold account, so I can´t see the image)

It was tagged as loli because it is rated questionable by user, not the other rate round.

Unbreakable said:

It's a nude, not particularly covered girl, that kind of thing tends to be rated as questionable.

indexador2 said:

You can look at the twitter source for the image. And yeah, I'd say a between the fact she's fully nude, looking at you, and blushing, it's at least questionable, and one would need to be quite desensitized to nudity to not notice it.

What I'm not sure about is the loli tag. I'm sure there are younger looking pictures untagged.

Despite not showing any sexual part or even nearly-sexual parts, and with a non-sexual posture (despite the blush)?
I think if this is a real life photo with same details then it can probably be used on safe for work advertisement without causing problems