Posted under Tags
BUR #35191 has been rejected.
create implication hashtag-only_commentary -> commentary
There seem to be mixed feelings on whether this tag is useful, but if we're keeping it and symbol-only commentary also implies commentary, I see no reason not to have this one do so as well. Any thoughts?
If the hashtag's text is in a non-english language, why not tag it commentary request? The text can still be translated. Why would any hashtag whether it's english or raw japanese text get tossed into commentary, simply because it's also a twitter search link?
Quoting the wiki for symbol-only commentary, "Bare, unformatted URLs and hashtags do not count against this tag." So if there is an emoji with hashtags, it doesn't need to be translated. I don't see why not having an emoji should make a difference.
It would be my dream to get this implied but unfortunately it seems like there's a weird strong resistance against this implication but nothing against symbol-only commentary.
Previous attempts can all be found in topic #25867.
I still don't know why people suddenly take issue with this. The clauses in symbol-only commentary and in commentary have been there for a good while, but people don't seem interested in seeing that as a problem. Yet here it suddenly is an insurmountable problem.
The following quote from commentary directly contradicts the idea of not having this implication:
If the only untranslated portions of a commentary are meta, such as hashtags or mentions, then tag it with commentary and not partial commentary or commentary request.
If this is wrong too, a discussion should be had to remove it, instead of just ignoring it.
Evil idea is to change symbol-only commentary into meta-only commentary or something as the compromise. Still though, hashtag-only commentary isn't any less useful than symbol-only commentary and at least the former is more descriptive about images than the latter. I will never understand how people can be resistant and think poorly about hashtag-only commentary yet not say the same about symbol-only commentary or maybe it's just that no one's made a move on it yet.
Evil idea is to change symbol-only commentary into meta-only commentary or something as the compromise.
I'm fine with that. My only complaint is that the meaning of meta-only isn't entirely obvious, but I can't think of a better name. Both tags have the same purpose of saying the commentary doesn't contain any "real" translatable text, just hashtags or emojis.
One problem though is that on some sites like Tumblr, sometimes the hashtags are the commentary. They're used to provide the actual comments on the image, and not just as character/copyright tags. In that case hashtag-only commentary can't safely imply commentary, since if the hashtags contain meaningful non-English text about the image it should be tagged commentary request instead. Although I guess calling it meta-only commentary could sidestep this problem, since these hashtags wouldn't be considered meta-only in that case.
The bulk update request #35191 (forum #328955) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
ANON_TOKYO said:
The following quote from commentary directly contradicts the idea of not having this implication:
If the only untranslated portions of a commentary are meta, such as hashtags or mentions, then tag it with commentary and not partial commentary or commentary request.
If this is wrong too, a discussion should be had to remove it, instead of just ignoring it.
Fair point. Then I'll start: I think that quote is wrong and should be changed or removed.
The problem is that there are hashtags with meaningful commentary, and you don't know which they are until you translate them. Most hashtags are not meaningful commentary, but the meaningful ones are out there. It's common on Tumblr as evazion mentioned, but there are plenty on Twitter too.
We don't imply english commentary to commentary (which would otherwise be pretty damn helpful) because there could be untranslated non-English commentary alongside it. I would guess that meaningful untranslated hashtags are at least as common as that.
If the tagger can't read a hashtag, they can't know whether it's meaningful. Calling the tag something else doesn't help when we can't expect taggers to be able to distinguish, and "meta-only" just makes it less intuitive to those that don't read forum/wiki. Using that name -- or this implication -- would mean the tag could only be correctly applied by someone capable of reading the hashtags. (The best bet for telling them apart for a user who can't read the source language might be filtering out translated names of tags on the Danbooru post, but that's yet another conversation.)
As for symbol-only commentary... Ignoring the bit about hashtags not counting against it (which I disagree with for the same reason as long as it implies commentary), a symbol-only commentary does not require any translation for an English-speaking reader. That isn't always true of a hashtag-only commentary.
Rant: The thing about commentary is that it's a pointless tag when stuff like "Untitled" or the character's name counts. Does anybody search for it? I don't see a point in the hashtag-only one either, and it doesn't even help to negate it because there are so many other types of useless commentaries that aren't tagged. That's why these arguments are endless. There is no practical use for the tag so the discussions always turn theoretical. If it were up to me, commentary would be left off if there's only character/copyright name and reserved for those that actually say something, but I seem to be in the minority, and it would be a terrible gardening project to change it now anyway. Commentary request on the other hand is a useful tag, but removing it doesn't mean you have to add commentary if you translated it and found it was meaningless.
More-or-less reiterating what heartattack & evazion & Super Affection said, hashtags can provide meaningful context not just for what is happening in the illustration (which may not be obvious from the image itself) but also context surrounding its creation (for instance, consider illustrations made for character birthdays e.g. post #8880377) — this is primarily useful for tagging but for general viewing also — for that reason I think it's worthwhile to translate them and thus reserve the ability to tag them with commentary request; this is why I disagree with this implication but it's not really an argument for hashtag-only commentary as a tag.
Commentary is, of course, very broad and different people have different approaches to applying or omitting it. Personally I've tagged character names as commentary, not because I harbour strong feelings that it should be done that way but just because that's what I've seen others do, conversely I've seen others tag 'Untitled' with commentary but have not done that myself. I agree that tagging either of those things as commentary sabotages whatever utility that tag does provide which I think it's conceivable that it might, I imagine there can be a scenario where there is an artist or mangaka or what have you that consistently provides clarification or background information in the commentary to their works that someone might consider useful enough to like to be able to search for, but not all of their works actually feature a commentary, so %artist%/%series% + commentary could end up being a useful search.
As for hashtag-only commentary, at 23k posts it's sort of gardenable? I mean several people (AngeAnge in particular!) are taking on the deprecated footwear stuff which is something like half a million posts in aggregate :LetsFuckingGo: — I rather doubt we'll get through it all but certainly not for lack of trying. So picking out actual commentaries out of hashtag-only seems like it would be feasible if we just got rid of hashtag-only commentary but not commentary wholesale
Will say it might be worth mentioning with all this commentary-related talk lately that commentary is also a metatag that can be searched—but while commentary:translated and commentary:untranslated bring results fairly fast, commentary:true and commentary:false always time out for me (unless presumably enough additional qualifiers are added to narrow down the search).
So I missed out on discussion for this BUR before it timed out, but it would be really nice to at least get some guidance here if we're not going to get the implication.
I will try to illustrate what I've been trying to do with some examples:
1. "#ダンジョン飯 #ミスルン" -> "#DungeonMeshi #Mithrun" + hashtag-only commentary + commentary
2. "#ダンジョン飯 #DungeonMeshi" -> hashtag-only commentary
3. "#ダンジョン飯 #DeliciousInDungeon #ミスルン" -> "#ダンジョン飯 #DeliciousInDungeon #Mithrun" + hashtag-only commentary + commentary
I have NOT been marking example 2 as commentary because I'm not doing anything to translate it, but I feel that examples like that should be tagged the same as 1 or 3, because all information is available and there's nothing to gain from further translation. Can we get some confirmation that this is intended?
I included the specific variation on example 3 because I feel that synonymous copyright names should also count as 'all information'.
Also, I do NOT feel that any of the examples I provided should count as mixed-language or bilingual, but it would have been nice to get some feedback on that.
I am for removing the "If the only untranslated portions of a commentary are meta, such as hashtags or mentions, then tag it with commentary and not partial commentary or commentary request." from the commentary wiki since it's an oversimplication as noted by Super Affection in more detail above.
I'm pretty neutral as to which way it goes, as long as it's a consistent with itself (i.e. not the current situation where hashtags don't count against commentary but somehow hashtag-only commentary is not commentary). I also don't think we should let a few sites using them weirdly (like tumblr) dicate the vast majority of cases (Twitter), but I don't know an ideal solution to that.
Oh, and if people are discussion changing their approach it should happen on the forums when people can read it, not on the Discord hidden away in a #tagging channel (oddly specific? Maybe).
ANON_TOKYO said:
I'm pretty neutral as to which way it goes, as long as it's a consistent with itself (i.e. not the current situation where hashtags don't count against commentary but somehow hashtag-only commentary is not commentary). I also don't think we should let a few sites using them weirdly (like tumblr) dicate the vast majority of cases (Twitter), but I don't know an ideal solution to that.
Oh, and if people are discussion changing their approach it should happen on the forums when people can read it, not on the Discord hidden away in a #tagging channel (oddly specific? Maybe).
I mean, is there literally anyone arguing that hashtags should never be translated? That we should just leave them perfectly preserved and untouched? The only discussion I had on the Discord was about what Unbreakable would personally prefer be the standard. The only outcome of that discussion that changes anything is that I'm going to make sure that I *do* translate at least one copy of each hashtag, so that if any are left untranslated, they are identical to ones that *have* been translated.
This is 100% in alignment with current guidance, which does not require that any meta text be translated.
ANON TOKYO has a valid point regarding the inconsistency between the guidance and this BUR failing, but I don't know that I can agree with Super Affection simply because these are tags that I use when translating commentaries, and it's really nice to know that I'm filtering out everything that's either translated OR already readable for English users just by including '-commentary'.
Edit: One other point of contention with Super Affection that I was reminded of when I got back to translating commentaries is that filtering out english commentary means filtering out untranslated posts that contain English text, so I prefer to instead filter out commentary, since obviously anything tagged as such is supposed to already be translated. (I have to qualify this statement because I literally just translated one that was not which I came across by searching a specific phrase.) This has the benefit of also filtering out symbol-only commentary, as it implies commentary.
If we accepted Super Affection's suggestion of not tagging for just a character/copyright's name, then my search results would be inundated with unwanted results, making it far more tedious to translate commentaries, as there would no longer be any effective way to filter out those results.
If there were some way to otherwise still filter those posts out, I'd be fine not tagging them, but I would also like to point out that there's potentially hundreds of thousands of commentary that consist of just the name of a character or copyright, so that would be a massive undertaking, one that I personally would not assist with because of the negative implications to my efforts to translate commentaries.
Are there ways I could still do commentary translations? Sure! I could do what I was doing when I remembered this and search for a specific word/phrase and look for posts containing it and no translation. I never even need to filter anything out when searching that way.
But it would mean an end to me systematically translating a character/copyright tag, which is where I'm doing more than just translating '魔女' into 'Witch' 50 times and instead am translating stuff more like post #4890903 which I wouldn't otherwise stumble across. So... which do we want? Me translating only '魔女' or more of me translating '魔女' AND 'イラリク シスヒ♂とミス♀ ありがとうございました!!'?
Updated
