imply number-only_commentary -> commentary

Posted under Tags

Super Affection

I don't think this should be a tag, but I don't think I want to alias it to symbol either.

One problem is goroawase: post #9305520 and post #9306203 are titled "Koishi" and could hypothetically be translated as such. I did so for post #9287370 where the title was "Nina" written as "27" (though it also has chinese commentary that I can't read so it wouldn't count for this tag anyway). Dunno if it really makes sense to translate goroawase or not. There are surely thousands of "39"s on Miku posts. Anyway, are those really "symbol-only commentaries"? I don't think they have anything in common with emoji.

Another problem is dates: post #9215059 is 2025 April 22nd, not two hundred fifty thousand four hundred twenty two. It should be dated commentary rather than symbol-only.

Then there's post #716190 where the depicted character's name is a number. I guess number-only is correct there, but still, what's the point? And it's still not "symbols" by our definition. That's like calling kanji "symbols" IMO.

Can we just kill this useless tag and leave it at that?

Reply
aster1a

BUR #41561 has been approved by @nonamethanks.

mass update number-only_commentary -commentary -> commentary

Considering what Super Affection said, I think number-only commentary is ambiguous. I’m in favor of nuking it.

Before the nuke though, I’d like to add commentary to the posts that lack it, on the basis that:
1.

Commentary wiki stating where the tag applies:

"A post where the artist commentary is understandable by the average English speaker."

2. Most number-only commentary posts already have commentary.

Reply
CommentaryRequest wispydreamer 馮福水牛校軾昆 Ylimegirl TenaciousTurtleDucks Akihi Maiguel user 1351581 jochu
1