Danbooru
Login Posts Comments Notes Artists Tags Pools Wiki Forum More »
Listing Upload Hot Changes Help

Search

  • Help
guro
scat
furry -rating:g

Artist

  • ? takeuchi takashi 1.9k

Copyrights

  • ? fate (series) 355k
  • ? ↳ fate/grand order 264k

Characters

  • ? artoria pendragon (fate) 41k
  • ? ↳ saber alter 6.8k
  • ? ↳ saber alter (final ascension) 362

General

  • ? 1girl 6.8M
  • ? ahoge 747k
  • ? black thighhighs 418k
  • ? blonde hair 1.8M
  • ? blush 3.3M
  • ? breasts 3.9M
  • ? dark persona 12k
  • ? elbow gloves 338k
  • ? gloves 1.5M
  • ? gothic lolita 19k
  • ? high heels 229k
  • ? lolita fashion 34k
  • ? nipples 924k
  • ? nude 555k
  • ? open mouth 2.7M
  • ? sitting 1.1M
  • ? small breasts 560k
  • ? snow 45k
  • ? solo 5.6M
  • ? thighhighs 1.3M
  • ? yellow eyes 801k

Meta

  • ? bad id 1.3M
  • ? ↳ bad pixiv id 995k
  • ? third-party edit 25k
  • ? ↳ nude filter 2.2k

Information

  • ID: 2342194
  • Uploader: HNTI »
  • Date: over 9 years ago
  • Size: 191 KB .jpg (539x758) »
  • Source: pixiv.net/artworks/56542583 »
  • Rating: Questionable
  • Score: 40
  • Favorites: 41
  • Status: Deleted

Options

  • Resize to window
  • Find similar
  • Download

History

  • Tags
  • Pools
  • Notes
  • Moderation
  • Commentary

This post was deleted for the following reason:

Unapproved in three days after returning to moderation queue (about 9 years ago)
This post belongs to a parent (learn more) « hide
post #2132776
artoria pendragon and saber alter (fate and 1 more) drawn by takeuchi_takashi
  • ‹ prev Search: user:HNTI status:deleted status:deleted status:deleted next ›
  • Comments
  • Recommended
  • Loading...

    Miene
    about 9 years ago
    [hidden]

    A non-trivial nude filter warrants a more descriptive deletion flag, no?

    1 Reply
    • Copy ID
    • Copy Link
    OOZ662
    about 9 years ago
    [hidden]

    Miene said:

    A non-trivial nude filter warrants a more descriptive deletion flag, no?

    Apparently it was decided they should be outright banned again, so not really.

    0 Reply
    • Copy ID
    • Copy Link
    user 460797
    about 9 years ago
    [hidden]

    OOZ662 said:

    Apparently it was decided they should be outright banned again, so not really.

    Apparently?
    I thought Hillside Moose was pretty clear in this thread to not approve every nude filter^^?

    0 Reply
    • Copy ID
    • Copy Link
    OOZ662
    about 9 years ago
    [hidden]

    Provence said:

    Apparently?
    I thought Hillside Moose was pretty clear in this thread to not approve every nude filter^^?

    It was a confusing time. The two mods that later became admins stated opposite opinions, then later one just kinda slotted into the rulebook. Honestly, I don't really care about the issue personally, the whole thing was just a bit muddy.

    0 Reply
    • Copy ID
    • Copy Link
    user 460797
    about 9 years ago
    [hidden]

    OOZ662 said:

    It was a confusing time. The two mods that later became admins stated opposite opinions, then later one just kinda slotted into the rulebook. Honestly, I don't really care about the issue personally, the whole thing was just a bit muddy.

    Well, at the end is was pretty clear, though. If one steps in, and the other doesn't complain, then this has to be considered concensus...even though it is also detrimental to me^^.

    0 Reply
    • Copy ID
    • Copy Link
    Terms / Privacy / Upgrade / Contact /