On Answering Word Requests

Question

I was recently informed by one of our moderators that:

We're looking for answers from experts in the field, not experts at Googling. :) "You have to write an actual answer, in your own words. A post that consists only of copied text … is not your work”.

I usually answer word requests in the following manner.

SUGGESTED WORD

Definition of the suggested word from a reputable source.

[Source Link] - Source URL spelled out

Is this type of answer not up to community standards? I feel like adding "my own words" will just be adding fluff to what should otherwise be a straightforward answer.

---

EDIT: I understand that this is a passionate topic for some, but please try to be respectful, especially to those whose opinion you may not share. Please don't forget to be nice.

Thanks!

Answer 1

SWRs are here to stay (for the time being). We've had this discussion a zillion times before. SWRs are not banned. Most users like SWRs. SWRs are often the plague/joy of HNQs, they often attract huge visitors because everyone likes games, and very often the people making a single-word-request learn something new. And sometimes hundreds of casual visitors learn something new from an answer posted on a SWR.

Next time

I suggest that the OP cites from the venerable OED, otherwise known as the Oxford English Dictionary. Whenever I have seen answers that are only copied and pasted directly in the answer, I have not seen any finger-wagging by any moderator. The OED is a fine book, it is a masterpiece but not everyone has access to it. Personally, I cannot afford the absurd annual subscription fee. I live in Italy, and there are no more libraries in the town where I live.

So, I shall continue to provide answers with links and full quotations from a varied and vast selection of online dictionaries. Sometimes I pad out the answer, and sometimes I take a break and just quote the definitions.

I don't think anyone has ever accused me of being lazy i.e. “copypasta”, but in the past I have accused regular users whose answers only consisted of dictionary links and definitions. That rarely happens now. I think things have greatly improved in the last three years.

There's a significant difference between finding the best solution and posting it along with a link and its definitions, and someone who posts and quotes from only dictionary and Wikipedia links ad infinitum.

Please mods, give contributors a break if they don't feel the urge to write a treatise each and every time. Sometimes, a short answer does the job fine.

Answer 2

You know the parable of the mechanic's hammer? I kinda feel like single word answers are the same sorta thing: it's not how much effort it takes to produce the answer so much as knowing the perfect answer in the first place.

However . . . in the parable, the ship owner can immediately evaluate whether the fix was effective. The story is powerful because even someone with no experience in ship repair can evaluate the difference between a functional engine and an engine that isn't working at all. The mechanic's process might be obscure, but not his results. That's not at all true for single word answers.

To put it another way, if you read SWRs with 2 or more answers how do you know which answer is best? Well, if you already have a masterful grasp of English vocabulary, it may be that the best word will lock into place like the last piece of a jigsaw puzzle. But what if you don't know what the words mean? Or what if the perfect word fits because of the way it's been used in literature not everyone has read? Or what if the word is perfect because someone imported it from some other language where it has that special je ne sais quoi?

So the dictionary definition might help sometimes, but not always. Adding a definition that doesn't explain why you picked the word is busywork, devalues your answer and doesn't help the asker or future readers. If you picked the word because of some obscure meaning, by all means quote the dictionary. But don't use the dictionary to provide cover for an answer that would otherwise be pure opinion.

Words are powerful

It's always bugged me that the mechanic in the story didn't look for root causes. In fact, nearly the same thing happened to me a few years ago. My truck wouldn't start so I called AAA. The tow truck driver asked me about the symptoms so that he could decide whether to jumpstart or tow. After I explained, he went into his toolbox, pulled out a hammer and started banging on my fuel tank. (He also rocked the truck back and forth for good measure, but that breaks the parallelism.) Then I started the engine and he told me to drive to a mechanic's shop right away.

You see, the teeth on the plastic gears in the fuel pump had sheared off in one spot. If I got lucky, they would line up properly the next time I shut the engine. But if I got unlucky, I'd need to hope the hammer trick worked again. I might have kept a hammer in the bed of the truck or I could just fix the problem. Since the tow truck driver was good at his job, I had the information to make that choice. (I got the pump replaced, if you were wondering.)

My point is, handing someone a hammer word might help their immediate problem, but won't solve the deeper question of how meaning is expressed in our wonderful, complex, sometimes-confounding language. If you suggest a Latin phrase and I try to use it in my country western song, it's possible there was something missing in the answer. (It's also possible I have no business being a songwriter, but that's a different story.) Tell me, in general terms, when your word choice is appropriate so I won't get booed off the honky-tonk stage.

Ultimately, word choice is subjective. Maybe that's why popular quotations are so often misquoted. If the original doesn't quite fit our need, we change it. (Whether knowingly or not is unimportant.) But allow me to (accurately) quote from a useful treatise on subjective questions:

Great subjective questions inspire answers that explain “why” and “how”. The best subjective questions invite explanation. If you’re asking for a product recommendation of some kind, you want answers to contain detailed information about the features and how they can be used, and why you might want to choose one over the other. “How?” and “Why?” has more lasting value than a bunch of product-feature bullet points or a giant enumerated list, no matter how extensive. In contrast, the bad subjective questions let answerers get away with hit-and-run answers that maybe provide a name and a link—but fail to provide any sort of adequate explanation, context, or background.

Show your work and encourage others to do the same

When I read the title of a SWR, I often think of a word straight from my gut. It just feels right, you know? I want to quickly type an answer and get the glory that comes from having exactly the right word for a situation. But then I read some of the answers and see how they argue for their word choice. And as often as not, there are better words than mine and the explanation opens my eyes. Or, there are words that work better in situations I hadn't considered. Other times, the explanation fails to convince me, which is better than no explanation at all. If I were to answer, I'd want to dig a bit more to find out why I like one particular word.

If you see an answer that doesn't back up its opinion, there are several choices:

• Downvote (or at least don't upvote).
• Ask a probing question in the comments: "How did you pick this word?"
• Vote to delete.
• If you feel generous, edit the answer.
• If not, write your own answer explaining why the word fits. (And please don't suggest that reusing a single word is plagiarism! If you don't want someone to steal your work, back up your answer.)

And sometimes it's a sign the question itself needs edits or deletion.

Answer 3

I learn best from examples, and here is an example of a good answer to a SWR. Of course there are many other answers that could serve as examples of good SWR answers, but this one was easy for me to find because it was mine.

The answer proposes icon to describe Rosa Parks, and gives the dictionary definition of the word. It then briefly discusses the history of icon, and explains why the religious origin of the word makes it suitable to apply to Rosa Parks. The answer goes on to give other, completely secular, meanings of icon in modern life, and then returns to the applicability of the word to Rosa Parks.

If the answer had given only a dictionary definition, it would have been a poor answer.

Answer 4

Unfortunately, this meta question seems mired in contentiousness, as if the community as a whole should either embrace and welcome such answers, or else reject them outright.

But perhaps we are simply dealing with a loaded question about a controversial subject:

Is this type of answer not up to community standards?

Perhaps a better, more constructive question would be:

Could this type of answer stand to be improved?

^{(If so, what are some ways to improve it?)}

I can think of a few different ways a single-word-request answer could go beyond the word-definition-link trio you've described. For example, one might:

• include some example usages by credible sources, such as news articles or published books

• comment about how obscure or familiar a word might be (or how regional, colloquial, formal, antiquated, dated, etc.)

• explain how or when the word is typically heard conversation, or caution about when it might be inappropriate

• add some notes about the word's etymology or history

• use multiple definitions, instead of just one, thereby providing a richer definition of the word itself

• suggest multiple words, instead of just one, and then discuss the strengths, weaknesses, and appropriateness of each

• think outside the box; that is, suggest an apt idiom (even if the OP originally requested a single word), or give a two-for-the-price-of-one answer, where one answer is more playful or humorous, while the other is more serious (I tried doing that here, e.g.)

I don't think there's any need to wrangle over whether or not every SWR answer needs to have such supplementary information, but I think most of us would at least agree that including some extra information some of the time would be better than refusing to paste anything more than one definition from a single dictionary.

I'm guessing that the moderator's original comment was intended to exhort you to do better, and thereby help make the site better. I think that's a worthy goal.

Answer 5

I agree with you. You have made your own contribution to the answer by selecting the word to suggest. I don't agree with having an absolute requirement for including more explanation than a quotation from a dictionary.

When you can, it's good to use your own words to explain why the suggested word would fit into the example sentence(s) given in the question, or the specific scenario described in the question.

"Remember, you still have to write an actual answer, in your own words. A post that consists only of copied text, even when attributed, is not your work either. Use quotes sparingly, to support your own words" is a quote originating from a 2016 revision of an old community wiki answer to a Meta Stack Exchange Meta question about (how to avoid) "plagiarism". It was not originally written as a policy for answers to SWR questions on this site.

I am aware of prior discussion on this site's Meta about when mods should delete one-line SWR answers without adequate citations (On deleting low quality single-word-request answers).

There's a difference between a "good" and an acceptable answer

I don't disagree with the examples given in ab2's answer, Mitch's answer or
J.R.'s answer of how additional explanation can improve an answer. I just think that the value of various types of additional explanation, beyond suggesting a word and citing a definition, is subjective enough that it should be up to the author of the question to decide which other components to include in a SWR answer.

My reading of tchrist's comment and answer is that he is not just saying that an answer with a word, definition and link "could be improved" or "is not a good answer". He's implying that it is unacceptable for the site and that it is subject to deletion at the discretion of site moderators. This is what I am trying to push back against with this answer. I don't have anything against encouraging people to put more thought into their answers to SWRs: I'm against the imposition of a standard for "minimally acceptable" SWR answers that I don't think has been established by the consensus of this site.

Quoted material must always be put in quotation marks/block quotes

One piece of advice from the Meta SE "plagiarism" post that is definitely applicable to SWR answers is that quotes should have special formatting, either with quotation marks (" " or ' ') for short snippets of text, or with block quote formatting for longer quotes:

block quotes

Even when you have attribution and a link, you shouldn't just copy and paste text without any quotation formatting. Using formatting to separate your quotes from the rest of the post makes it easier for readers to distinguish the parts of the post that were written by you from the parts that were written by other people.

Answer 6

That is a good start to an answer and probably what should be necessary for a SWR. A suggestion, a quote of a respected resource plus a link to it.

But it's not sufficient for a good answer. Anybody can do a dictionary or thesaurus lookup to answer an SWR. It's simply cut and paste and is only a good answer if everyone else blinks at your answer to satisfy an expert's confirmation bias. Also it shows that, if that reference has a link, the answer was easily googlable.

A good answer is one that explains things, tells why a suggestion is good, adds more than the existing dictionary entry or thesaurus list gives. The readers, whether native or non-native speakers, may not be aware of nuances or even the major denotation.

It is secondary, but not unimportant, the point about 'is not your work'. Your answer, while quoting a dictionary in fair use, is not talking about copy-pasting an explanation. That is bordering on plagiarism, or if referenced, empty googling.

Answers should add to knowledge, not just repeat it.

Answer 7

We should leave plagiarism, or intimations of plagiarism, out of this discussion. Plaigiarism is something else entirely than writing a dictionary (or other source) definition, and properly attributing the source.

From the OED (Emphasis added):

plagiarism is: The action or practice of taking someone else's work, idea, etc., and passing it off as one's own; literary theft.

Plagiarism is far, far more serious than writing a poor answer. I would be livid if even tangentially accused of plagiarism if I had written a copypasta answer, with proper attribution.

And let's keep in mind that people make mistakes, and inadvertently leave out the attribution. (I did, but remembered it several hours later.) In such cases, point the error out in a polite comment.

Plagiariam has no place in this discussion.

Answer 8

The idea behind SE is to get experts to answer questions, and an expert in English should be able to explain why the word they've chosen is better than all of the other choices out there. Anyone with a little skill with Google and/or a thesaurus can figure out a word and link a dictionary definition. I don't find the definition-only "guesses" at what the author is looking for very valuable.

I think an acceptable answer has some explanation of why the author chose to offer that word as an answer. How does it fit the criteria? Are there any of the criteria it doesn't meet very well? Is it a common word? Are there any connotations? Is there an alternative for it if you don't want those connotations?

Answer 9

I completely agree with you.

If one-word requests shouldn't be on the site, then set that as a policy.

But I believe that providing a word with a citation and its dictionary definition is a completely acceptable answer for this type of question.

Sometimes, the dictionary definition is, on its own, insufficient to explain why you thought it was good. In that case, exposition is definitely needed. But, at other times, the definition itself is clear and concise—and anything else would just be taking up space. The person asking the question, and voters, will determine the worth of the answer beyond that.

---

I also find the phrase "not experts at Googling :)" to be misleading and subtly demeaning. The smiley symbol afterwards does nothing to dismiss that message—it might even make it worse.

Personally, I rarely ever use Google to find a word. I spend time thinking about it and coming up with one from my own vocabulary. After which, I cite it and sometimes expand on it. It comes from my own "expert" knowledge of English and is unrelated to Google.

To dismiss these efforts in such a way is a hasty generalization and unhelpful.

Answer 10

Your response contained nothing of your own words. That's the problem. You have to write a real answer, not just copy others' text. We are not a pasta factory: we expect original content. You didn't provide any.

The SE model is about building up a library of expert answers to real problems that people have so that others with the same problem will be able to save time by finding the answer here.

There is nothing "expert" in being able to Google. Without original content, you haven't answered. And if that's all a question draws, it should have been closed.

From Meta Stack Exchange, emphasis mine:

“Remember, you still have to write an actual answer, in your own words. A post that consists only of copied text, even when attributed, is not your work either. Use quotes sparingly, to support your own words.”

Therefore, SWR responses with only copied-in text, howsoever duly attributed, are not actual answers anywhere in Stack Exchange. You haven’t written anything, so you were given notice of this in order that you might have the opportunity to do something to fix.

Posts without original content risk being deleted.

Our official guidance from Stack Exchange management about this matter is:

We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.