User blog comment:Ajraddatz/Article comments/@comment-5266525-20120918225707

On one hand...

''* Comments 'detract' from an article in the sense that their information can be misleading, incorrect or irrelevant to the article in question. (eg. "Just went 51/0/1 with Trynd lol :D" etc.)''

* Comments and their feature of replies create a sense that the page is more of a forum of some sort related to the content of the article.

* Comments are not sorted in any way, leading to what could be useful information becoming swamped in less useful trivia and making it difficult to locate.

* Comments conflict with the ideals of a wiki in that its purpose is to provide an accurate and organised deposit of information that anyone may edit and anyone may use.

* Most people who visit the site do not do so for the purpose of reading and writing comments (according to NeonSpotlight).


 * Comments are a difficult and time-consuming feature to maintain on a daily basis by wiki moderators.

On the other hand...

''* Comments 'enhance' an article in the sense that it can provide genuinely useful information which bolsters the knowledge contained on the page. (eg. "You know, I just tried this so-and-so build on Anivia and it worked out pretty well for me, here are my reasons..." etc.)''

* Comments can allow a concerned wiki user to ask for clarification on a particular topic.

* Comments do not interfere overtly with the perusal of the article as they are always located below the main content section.

* Comments can allow for a wiki editor to more visibly provide evidence pointing for a related change in the article (eg. "New leaked champion skillset found, link below!" etc.)


 * A minority of wiki users are indeed wiki users solely on the basis of these comments.

Tell me if I missed anything. Personally, I'd rather have them back, though I don't lean either way when it comes to which one I use the wiki for. It's just that I feel their pros outweigh the cons they bring.