create implication low_twintails -> twintails
Seems like a subtype, unless there's been discussion otherwise.
Updated by S1eth
Posted under General
create implication low_twintails -> twintails
Seems like a subtype, unless there's been discussion otherwise.
Updated by S1eth
Should things like post #1415728 and post #1312558 count as twintails? Sounds slightly strange to me.
In my opinion, they do qualify as twintails, as their hair is parted into two sections.
Rather than low twintails, the tag that I think is most commonly erroneously tagged twintails are those that should have the two_side_up tag.
Toks said:
Should things like post #1415728 and post #1312558 count as twintails? Sounds slightly strange to me.
I would just tag the latter payot. In general, I think that any kind of *tail is supposed to be on the back of the head (or at least not in front of the ears)
I agree with payot for post #1312558. post #1415728 on the other hand is something I've never really known what to call but low_twintails definitely works, and I will implicate twintails for that. They should be considered a kind of twintail. Someone may just want to go through and clean up those that are really payots.