From the Pointless Pools thread:

Fred1515 said:
pool #7284: One Piece Swimsuit Tan
If we need to differentiate between tans, this looks specific enough to be a tag.

kounishin said:
I'm inclined to say it should be generalised to swimsuit_tan or swimsuit_tanline, with the specific type of swimsuit also being tagged where it can be distinguished; I know there are plenty of images with tanlines from bikinis or male swim trunks, and a fair few that specifically indicate things like a string bikini or competition swimsuit. The only question would be, how much is there that would qualify for tanline but not swimsuit_tanline?

Anyway, yes, almost certainly a taggable concept rather than a pool one.

Log said:
What would the point in generalizing it to swimsuit tanline? Like 80% of tanlines are going to be either bikinis or one-piece swimsuits, 19% males with swim trunks, and the remaining 1% other.

kounishin said:
It seems like if we were to create one_piece_swimsuit_tan, then we'd also need to create bikini_tan, swim_trunks_tan, probably swim_briefs_tan, and possibly others if there are more specific types that are common enough - and that doesn't necessarily cover cases where we can see tanlines but don't know what sort they are (eg, post #1444905).

But as you say, tanline is 99% swimsuit tans anyway (maybe more; I couldn't find any in a quick skim that weren't), so maybe that's not really a problem. Might be worth opening a discussion thread for, though I'm too lazy to do so right now.

BCI_Temp said:
I would oppose generalizing it to swimsuit tanline because there aren't very many other sources of tanline images worth tagging.

I think it might be at least worth creating a one-piece_swimsuit_tan for now to cover the pool.

+1
Simple tag with simple rule.

It appears to me that people only push the creation of a tag because it appears to be the simplest way of getting rid of the pool.
Ignoring the pool's existence, we should ask ourselves if we even need specialized tags for different tanlines.
And if we really do, one-piece_swimsuit_tan is not enough. We would also need to create a bikini_tan, and one for the swimsuit trunks, and another one for non-swimsuit tanlines.

I have the feeling this would open the floodgates for people to start tagging other tans, such as bikini_tan, sling_bikini_tan, micro_bikini_tan, leotard_tan, etc.

I wouldn't really have a problem with any or all of these, they're pretty simple and clear-cut as far as tags go, and would allow for more refined tanline searches.
The only issue is whether we want to specialize that much as S1eth said, though there doesn't seem to be any real harm in doing so if people are so inclined.

I haven't gone through the tag in a while but I am fairly certain bikini tanlines are a large majority (like 80% majority) of the tag, one piece secondary, and trunks/speedos third, with everything else dead last. I can see one piece being taggable as being a deviation as the no_thing tags are. The only difference here is that tanlines aren't binary.

I think that we really only need four major tags to cover this, under the same logic behind having shirt lift consolidate multiple related articles of clothing:

• One-piece tan: Covers one-piece swimsuits, leotards, and other similar tan-lines.
• Bikini tan: Covers any type of bikini (including sling bikinis), bras, sports-bras, etc.
• Shirt tan: Covers all other top clothing.
• Shorts tan: Covers shorts, trunks, briefs, etc.

Naturally, the wiki pages should link to the others.

Over-specialization will make the tags hard to remember and quibbly. How do you tell the difference between a one-piece swimsuit tanline and a leotard tanline? Or between bikini tan and bra tan? Is there any value in trying?

The only other tag I can see being of value would be multiple tanlines for "stacked" tan lines.

BCI_Temp said:

• One-piece tan: Covers one-piece swimsuits, leotards, and other similar tan-lines.
• Bikini tan: Covers any type of bikini (including sling bikinis), bras, sports-bras, etc.
• Shirt tan: Covers all other top clothing.
• Shorts tan: Covers shorts, trunks, briefs, etc.

This looks pretty good, +1.

Fred1515 said:

This looks pretty good, +1.

I like.

I consider sling bikinis to be in a league of their own to be lumped with standard two-piece bikinis. Other than that, +1.

I would be honestly surprised if there were more than 10 sling bikini tanline images.

Probably needs 1 more tag:

• Accessory tan: Covers tanlines from gloves, thighhighs and other legwear, jewelry, etc.

(e.g. Villeta Nu in the center of post #252151.)

Hillside_Moose said:

I consider sling bikinis to be in a league of their own to be lumped with standard two-piece bikinis. Other than that, +1.

I think putting them in a league of their own invites endless specialization. They function more like a one-piece, but bikini's right in the name, and they're skimpier than a normal one-piece, so bikini's the better fit in my mind.

BCI_Temp said:

I think putting them in a league of their own invites endless specialization.

We can put our foot down if someone else tries afterwards and you're already inviting specialization with accessory_tan.

They function more like a one-piece, but bikini's right in the name, and they're skimpier than a normal one-piece, so bikini's the better fit in my mind.

There are two basic swimsuit shapes, bikinis and one-pieces. With one-pieces, people would expect school swimsuits, competition swimsuits, and other body-fitting suits; with bikinis, people expect traditional bikinis, tankinis, micro bikinis, and so on. Sling bikini doesn't really fit in either category: not worn as two pieces for it to be a bikini, yet not body-fitting as a traditional one-piece. You've said as much yourself.

There's also risqué factor with a sling tan that makes it more unique. The tan's not easily concealable and it would be plainly obvious they were wearing a sling when wearing street clothes, especially midriff-bearing ones.

Log said:

I would be honestly surprised if there were more than 10 sling bikini tanline images.

Which is why they should get their own tag, given how rare it is.

Hillside_Moose said:

We can put our foot down if someone else tries afterwards and you're already inviting specialization with accessory_tan.

I would think that lumping legwear, armwear, and jewelry all into one category is the opposite.

Well, if you're that set on it, fine, but the Wiki page for it and/or for bikini tan when linking to it should spell out those reasons for considering it unique.

BCI's list of four is probably adequate. I've implicated tanline for those.

Four wikis created.

Should I go ahead with accessory tan as well or skip it for now?

Moved the pool to one-piece_tan. Requesting pool #7284 be deleted.

I've added sling_bikini_tan to some posts. Sorry, but lumping it with either one-piece_tan or bikini_tan would just make it a pain to find.

Remember to add a Wiki page and explain the logic behind it.

Toks said:

Moved the pool to one-piece_tan. Requesting pool #7284 be deleted.

It's important to also check child & parents links when tagging pools. I found over a dozen missed images.

(Of course, they would probably have been caught when I do a tagging trawl through tanline over the next couple of days, so no real harm.)