I mostly read random people's programming related blog posts. Knowing whether the article just is kind of bad at explaining what it's trying to say, or if important parts of it is missing, is really not obvious.
If paragraphs of text go missing, maybe you notice it instantly, but if it's images or code blocks which aren't explicitly mentioned in the body text of the article and just let exist to contextualize or demonstrate what the author is talking about, how will you know that something is missing? More importantly, is it even possible to develop a heuristic which catches almost all cases where parts are missing, without lots of false positives for cases which are just inexperienced authors writing bad articles?
