Revealing_clothes tag usage

Is there a consensus on how the tag is supposed to be used? The way the wiki indicates, the revealing clothes tag is supposed to be used for clothes that show copious amounts of bare skin to an extent that the clothes themselves would be very impractical and bizarre to wear; basically not something you would see someone typically wear in a public setting. A few proper examples that comes to mind is Shuten Douji and a transformed Ryuko.

However, there are alot of posts tagged as "revealing clothes" when the character is shown wearing stuff like bikinis, standard crop tops, etc.; this seemingly contradicts the intended usage of the tag, since bikinis and crop tops aren't really something that is considered "impractical" to wear.

Anyone else think this could be a case of horrendous mistagging?

It is. revealig clothes should be for what one may informally refer to as "dressing like a stripper". A good amount of eroticism and exoticness is required, not something you would wear in public, not even as a swimsuit.

I remember writing the initial drafts for the wiki, and I did add the clause that clothes like swimsuits, lingerie, bikini armor, harem outfits and such were not to be given the revealing clothes tag due to the revealing elements being expected. Unfortunately, not everyone reads the wikis, leading them to make incorrect assumptions. It's frustrating that even the most well-written wiki is rendered useless by those types of taggers, but that's just how things go here. We can't force everyone to read every scrap of fine print across so many wikis. All that can be done is to fix the errors and message the habitual mistaggers, hoping they'll learn from their mistakes.

I think there should be a clearer definition.
As it is right now, a lot of it is left on the tagger, and this results in the tag being extremely broad. For example, post #5281453, post #5269214, post #5286825, are technically revealing.
My personal standard for revealing clothes would be at minimum something impractical like post #5269644, prone to "mishaps". The wiki definition mentions that such an outfit "[wouldn't] leave much to the imagination", so I would expect it revealing at least part of the privates.
On that note, Shuten's outfit is technically less revealing than a normal bikini, so if bikinis aren't allowed I wouldn't allow outfits like hers either.
Another character which I see tagged a lot is shiranui mai, and frankly I wouldn't consider her outfit as revealing enough either.
That said, that's my personal definition, and I expect others not to agree with me, which demonstrates how broad this tag is.

The issue goes the other way around too - at which point do they reveal too much to be considered outfits? Can post #3852486 or post #5023910 be considered outfits?
I'm against a nuke of the tag, but at the same time I'm not sure how to fix it.

There had been some mistagged (per wiki), there's lots of grey area too. Incidentally, if the bar is expectation then reverse outfit would probably now be considered exempt too.

Username_Hidden said:
The issue goes the other way around too - at which point do they reveal too much to be considered outfits? Can post #3852486 or post #5023910 be considered outfits?

3852486 - Reverse outfit; 5023910 - possibly could be re-tagged as maebari pasties.

Okay, so it seems like the consensus among you guys is that revealing clothes is misused to the point in which it effectively becomes a broad and subjective tag.

Actually, I wonder if aliasing the tag to another name would do good for it in the long run. The tag is supposed to be used for "revealing clothes" that are impractical and nonsensical to wear in a general public setting. Maybe naming it something like impractically revealing clothes? Yeah, "impractically revealing clothes".

BUR #9907 has been rejected.

create alias revealing_clothes -> impractically_revealing_clothes

forum #210621, forum #210636, and forum #210720

Inujerr said:

Okay, so it seems like the consensus among you guys is that revealing clothes is misused to the point in which it effectively becomes a broad and subjective tag.

Actually, I wonder if aliasing the tag to another name would do good for it in the long run. The tag is supposed to be used for "revealing clothes" that are impractical and nonsensical to wear in a general public setting. Maybe naming it something like impractically revealing clothes? Yeah, "impractically revealing clothes".

I was having the same thought, but I'm not really a fan of the tag name. Maybe impractical_outfit or impractical_costume? Calling it 'clothes' is sort of counterintuitive when the point is to describe the lack of clothing in the first place. Then again, the same could be said for 'outfit' or 'costume', but 'clothes' makes me think of contemporary garments like shirts, pants, shorts, socks and so on. Outfit/costume makes it sound more like an exotic ensemble of garments.

If it's supposed to be for clothes that might as well be falling off of someone, then very_revealing_clothes is a much better name than impractically_revealing_clothes. Both of these names sound stupid to me though; I hate having to obtusely rename tags because of constant misuse.

Impractical outfit is good but still ambiguous. I think my vote goes towards very revealing clothes.

Before i start gardening,

or similar pieces where the revealing elements are largely expected out of such articles (such as underwear, harem outfits, or certain cultural outfits).

Does this mean that "standard outfits" such as Shiranui Mai's or Shuten Douji's need to be removed from the tag?

Username_Hidden said:

Does this mean that "standard outfits" such as Shiranui Mai's or Shuten Douji's need to be removed from the tag?

I believe so, yeah. Mai's outft in particular just looks like a standard sleeveless kimono.

This bulk update request is pending automatic rejection in 5 days.

This bulk update request has been rejected because it was not approved within 45 days.

The bulk update request #9907 (forum #210721) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.

Maybe no one cares about this discussion now,
Clothing that from the outset exposes or accentuates the pubic area for the purpose of arousing the opposite sex. (“nipple cutout” or “covered nipple”)
Clothing that exposes a large area of skin but does not expose the pubic area and does not go beyond the realm of sexy. (e.g., “cleavage cutout” or “side slit”)
Clothing that is not considered embarrassing in terms of the local culture in the official setting.
Clothing that is considered embarrassing or too revealing in terms of local culture in the official setting.

These should be separated.
In particular, I think the first one is what we should call “revealing_clothes”.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

I like that idea.