Conflicting descriptions of loli and child

I noticed that post #3548945 is tagged loli despite being safe enough to be considered a child post. I went onward to discuss this further since the child tag says the following:

If the child is involved in sexual acts, use the loli or shota tags as appropriate.

and the loli tag says:

This tag is for sexually explicit or sexually suggestive art work of girls who appear to be young or preadolescent (roughly between age 7 and 12). Please note the character's canonical age doesn't matter.

Work-safe, non-sexual images of young girls should not be tagged as loli - that is what the child tag is for.

So far so good, because it's not explicit and work-safe this confirms that post #3548945 should be tagged child instead. Here are the current child examples of a valid post under the child wiki:
post #2318923, post #304994, post #899512, post #1014753, post #634484, post #860832, post #1649352, post #996382, post #2571281, post #869540

However upon showing the example post #2318923 to @Unbreakable he promptly changed it loli because it's not work-safe. I can see how it isn't work-safe, but the examples under the child wiki, namely post #2318923, post #304994, post #1014753, post #860832, post #1649352, post #2571281 and post #869540 don't look work-safe either. That's 7 out of 10 examples that contradict what the wikis say.

We're confused: What constitutes as a work-safe post? Is it just a matter of censoring what mangakas would to comply with Japanese law? At which point does a child post become a loli post?

There’s a grey area of non-work-save, non-sexual posts. Some consider posts like post #2318923 as non-loli because they consider them as non-sexual nudity. After all, taking a bath is an everyday thing and is usually done naked.

Discussion about borderline posts usually go in topic #8650. Searching the forum for a post ID is also good to check if it’s been brought up before, such as the example post.

Interestingly, Unbreakable brought up post #2318923 in forum #132569 two years ago because of it being tagged loli despite being on the child wiki, then forgot and now changed it to loli again.

kittey said:

Interestingly, Unbreakable brought up post #2318923 in forum #132569 two years ago because of it being tagged loli despite being on the child wiki, then forgot and now changed it to loli again.

While I brought them up I never said that they should be tagged as child, I merely wanted the wiki to be accurate with the examples. While there are a few more of the examples under the child part of the wiki that I'm skeptical to them being both child and rating:q, while rating:s isn't always work-safe rating:q is for nsfw stuff, this is the one I most think should get the loli tag because of how her naked body, even when "censored", is prominent and the focus of the images.

Although if others agree that it should be tagged with child despite being rating:q I'll just go with the flow instead of causing trouble, I just want to be on the safe side since loli is a sensitive tag.

I think the problem is that the Loli page is really vague about questionable posts that are not inherently sexual, creating the grey zone.
Would help if Loli is either updated to always apply in the case of questionable posts, or updated to only encompass sexually suggestive posts.
Just my two cents.