I've been seeing a lot of comment action lately that is somewhere between misguided and utterly superfluous. I grant the comment feature is a hard one to get used to¹ —particularly for those coming in from discussion forums— but I also see people that have been around a long time still sending mixed messages through their example. I think we could probably compose some guidelines for comments covering several issues that would be more specific to our site than the help page and easier to direct people toward than finding issue specific meta posts.
When should the comment feature be used and when should it be avoided?
may link to other resources such as related questions on the site but may not link to things expected to substitute for an answer the question.
✗ Did you even read Wikipedia: ‹Article›?
✔ Related question on our sister site: ‹Question›.
Comments on answers…
may ask for clarification about how a point answers the question if it isn’t clear.
may ask the answer to further explain some aspect of the question not originally addressed.
may correct factual details that can be reasonably corrected by the author without changing the substance of the answer.
may inform the author that they missed something about the scope of a question (or that a question was edited) that they should take into account in their post.
should not provide alternatives to a completely wrong answer. If an answer is just wrong and you feel the need to set the record straight, vote it down and then hit up that answer form and submit a better entry.
should not explain how the beliefs described in an aswer are wrong theologically. If they wrongly represent the theological tradition asked about in the scope of the question that’s one thing, but if they are just flat out wrong then stay away from that comment link.