I have asked a question about a word (so in my understanding a single-word request but I probably tagged it wrongly as word-choice) for the "text" that often appears in the body of scientific publications (theses, papers, ...) and in general any written document between a (sub)chapter heading and the following subchapter heading. Initially, it was voted that my question be closed because it was "Not suitable for this site". Then, it was migrated to ELL "because it can be answered by speakers of other languages learning English".
The link to the question on academia (which I found after asking): https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/162433/what-is-the-name-of-the-text-that-might-exist-after-the-chapter-heading-and-befo
What makes my question specifically an ELL question? Compared to some other single-word requests on here, I consider it to be quite "sophisticated".
I'm not insisting that it's suitable for ELU, but I'm curious about the reasoning behind the migration (I mean, actually, I am asking this question because I find the decision to migrate it to ELL ridiculous and am sure that it stems from not understanding the question/problem at all, but I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt, but nobody answers ...).
I would be really interested, Anton, fev, or KillingTime ... Of course I would also be very interested in your knowledgeable answers to this mundane ELL question.
Weeks have passed and I must come to the conclusion that you did not understand the question and if you would have and you would have known an answer you would have been the first to answer it.
The sound of silence.
It was pointed out in the answer(s) that "... it's easier not to stoke a fire when a user appears to be more interested in conflict than in a discussion.". I rephrased my absolutely overly-polite meta-question a couple of times and it got a bit more "bold" with every edit (to "provoke" an answer). I am not interested in conflict. I want to know why my question was close voted first and then migrated almost immediately after I posted it even though I tried my best to clarify any of the "good-faithed" remarks (which was hard, because they were not very logical and kinda presumptuous).
As for the silence to my question on meta, I think it is a sham argument to use my "hostility" and further postulate it's the lack of ability that prevents the concerned people from giving an educated answer.