Missing Commentary

I couldn't find any relevant discussion on the creation of missing commentary.

At the very least it should be discussed to assess its validity.

Same. I just noticed it one day and started using it when the Bilibili and/or Arca.Live extractors were down. Bilibili works intermittently so I replace it when I can fetch the commentary, meanwhile Arca.Live is dead and hasn't worked for a hot minute now as far as I'm aware. I ended up creating a wiki page for it since I noticed people other than me were using it as well and just for clarification's sake.

It's very much a pet tag in its current state and is functionally no different from me creating a favgroup to track things that I need to add commentary to (or -has:commentary -source:*/status/* to exclude Twitter posts that sometimes have no attached text), be it when the extractor is fixed or if I have to do it manually.

I think it's fine, to me it's functionally similar to tagme--the uploader acknowledging "hey uh I missed a thing when posting this, someone (hopefully me) better loop back around to that later". It shouldn't be an excuse for intentionally not including commentary obviously, just like tagme isn't.

(For what it's worth, it seems like the tag was created by user #383467.)

If you notice the commentary is missing you should just add it yourself and dm the user about remembering to add commentary. To me, just seems like a bloat tag that serves no real purpose other than:
"Um excuse me, you seem to have forgotten about the commentary. Let me remind you of it ☝️🤓".

I think most people using the tag are applying it to their own posts when uploading it, at least that's what WRS has been doing. I added it to one (1) post from TikTok because the uploader doesn't fetch commentary from TikTok, noticed there was commentary on TikTok, and I was on mobile and didn't want to copypaste it myself. Which I've now fixed. Problem solved

Dannk said:

If you notice the commentary is missing you should just add it yourself

Hence using it when Bilbili and Arca.Live extractors are down, while also mentioning it's functionally equivalent to just using a favgroup or the -has:commentary query while excluding Twitter results since they're often a real case of not having commentary to be fetched. I remember better this way or if not me, then someone else (e.g. hdk5 helped me fetch some Bilibili commentary while it was down once). I otherwise always add it by hand if it's reasonable or doesn't contradict the normal formatting - such as in the case of dcinside and Patreon, whose extractors are down but manually inputting the commentary is straightforward.

Bumping this thread because of comment #2569708:

@andlabs said:

In this case partial commentary is literal: this is just a segment of the commentary. I bought this a few days ago, but now the listinga ppears to have bene pulled completely, with booth showing a 404 page and the item vanishing from the artist's storefront entirely... The fraction that I preserved is from a Discord embed and the title is from my Buyee purchases list.

I don't think this is an appropriate use of partial commentary, but we currently don't have a tag for expressing incomplete commentaries like this (I would know, I've sometimes added commentaries titles based on SauceNAO's results for bad Pixiv ID posts). Currently about a third of missing commentary consists of bad ID, which isn't really good for a tag that's supposed to be "hey when the extractor works again remember to fetch the commentary," as, you know, there's nothing to fetch.

Should missing commentary's scope be expanded to include posts that should have commentaries but lack them due to bad IDing and incomplete commentaries, should we make a new tag for cases like this, or should we leave them untagged?

Damian0358 said:

I don't think this is an appropriate use of partial commentary,

It definitely isn't. Regardless of the tags' current limitations, the user should've known better than to intentionally hijack a tag to use it for a completely different purpose.

In the meantime, I'll change it to missing commentary for now because it's much closer in both the spirit and common usage of the tag even if not technically 100% correct, and it's much less misleading than using a tag indicating the commentary was partially translated when it wasn't.

Edit: Same user also added it to post #10537077, except no commentary was added to the post at all.

Damian0358 said:

Should missing commentary's scope be expanded to include posts that should have commentaries but lack them due to bad IDing and incomplete commentaries, should we make a new tag for cases like this, or should we leave them untagged?

In my opinion, the tag should contain both.
Bad ID posts can be easily filtered out if desired, but the commentaries could potentially be populated from various on- and offline archives so having missing commentary be tagged is useful even for bad ID posts.
Partially missing commentary might warrant a sub-tag but I think there's no reason to exclude it from the tag, the post is still missing a part of the commentary and someone looking for posts that are missing commentary should also find such posts.

Using partial commentary for such posts is a misuse of the tag in my opinion, it means people looking to populate missing commentaries won't find the post while confusing translators looking for half-translated commentaries.

Damian0358 said:

Should missing commentary's scope be expanded to include posts that should have commentaries but lack them due to bad IDing and incomplete commentaries, should we make a new tag for cases like this, or should we leave them untagged?

I also think it should include bad ID. I've gone by and fixed missing commentary from Chinese sites when I see it a couple times, you can easily just exclude it if you're on a fixing spree. There's always the possibility someone has a screenshot or archive of the old commentary and would like to fix it in the future.