Timeline for Level of questions expected on ELL: is migration violating 'A friendly reminder: ELL is not EL&U's trash can' principle?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 25, 2016 at 1:50 | comment | added | deadrat | We have already squeezed as much as possible into that close reason. I find it's not quite condescending enough for my tastes. Surely someone can be counted on to remedy that. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 18:57 | vote | accept | Edwin Ashworth | ||
| Sep 16, 2016 at 17:17 | comment | added | Lawrence | @EdwinAshworth I've discussed pre-emptive editing with a few others at Sandy Lanes (1, 2) - look towards the end of each for the conclusions. Summary: so long as it appears to be in line with the OP's intent, edit as much as necessary, then drop a comment to the OP about the edit with an invitation to roll back or edit further. Here's a recent example of this style of editing. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 10:27 | comment | added | Andrew Leach Mod | If you mean a question migrated to ELL which turns out to be a duplicate on that site, then you'll need to ask them. If it's simply closed as a duplicate, the system is likely to treat it as a failed migration [shouldn't be there either], which helps no-one. Preventing that does take moderator action. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 10:24 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | Do the folk on ELL deal with duplicated migrations (it's hard enough to investigate those in-house)? | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 10:19 | comment | added | Andrew Leach Mod | We have already squeezed as much as possible into that close reason. It's really for askers to research (I'm afraid) the requirements of sites. Hopefully, having a question closed here for lack of effort might give a hint that that could happen elsewhere. If ELL didn't have the research requirement then it really would be a dumping ground. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 10:16 | comment | added | Edwin Ashworth | Thank you, Andrew. I've got problems with the close-vote given reason, then. I feel there needs to be more prominence given to the fact that ELL does not welcome unresearched questions either. / There is also the matter of how many liberties one should take to 'convert' a poor question ('What do 'need to' and 'want to' mean?) to a good one (DED defines 'want' as in '... want to ...' thus: / and 'need' as in '... need to ...' thus: .... Are there other, possibly overlapping senses? Are there historical links, as one writer claims?) OP probably intended nothing of the sort. | |
| Sep 16, 2016 at 9:58 | history | answered | Andrew LeachMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |