What General Reference answers this question?

Question

The recent question on how to represent in English a language which does not have a word for "I" has been closed as General Reference and deleted. Link (10k only; text below)

I've seen What is a "General Reference": Wikipedia? TV Tropes? Urban Dictionary? and Common accepted online resources and [Main site] What are your favorite English language tools? which list some resources which qualify as General References for ELU. Different SE sites will have different General References, so I understand that the message itself is going to be vague and users will need to refer to such external lists of resources.

There is of course the possibility that the question is off-topic, and perhaps it should have been phrased as I've described in my first sentence here rather than being presented as a translation issue. Perhaps "When translated into English" should have been "If I am to render this spoken sentence in English". Perhaps the question should have gone to Writers.SE. But it wasn't closed as off-topic; it's General Reference.

What General Reference exists which answers the deleted question about how to cope with un-English mannerisms or constructions in English? If it can be identified then it can be added to the list in the linked question(s).

---

In some cultures people might call themselves by their name.

For example if her name is May she might say in her native language

May has a very important thing to say.

When translated to English, should it be changed to

I have a very important thing to say.

in order to fit in with common practice in English language?

Answer 1

I've reopened the question—it is clearly not general reference by any test, litmus or otherwise. The close reason of General Reference was created specifically for EL&U and SF&F, on the basis that these sites receive an extraordinary number of questions for which uncontroversial and uninteresting answers are easily available and findable. This question meets none of those criteria.

I'll also quickly address the other close reasons:

• Exact duplicate: no one has suggested one as far as I can tell, nor am I aware of one
• Off-topic: The question is about English
  • Proofreading: Not proofreading
  • Writing question: While the question is about how to write a sentence, it is not inherently one about writing.
  • "How to improve": no
  • Translation: While the question rises from a translation, the question-in-essence is not one limited to the scope of translation
  • Naming: no
  • Literature: no
  • Joke: no
• Not Constructive: a reasonably objective answer may exist
• NARQ: while the question could be edited for improvement, it is reasonably answerable in its current form
• Too Localized: no

That doesn't mean the question can't be improved, but there is no substantial reason for it to be closed.

Answer 2

I agree the question is not general reference. When I did a short TEFL course there was nothing covering this sort of issue, so if people teaching English don't know it, I don't see how the question is too basic.

It could be considered off topic if there is a generally accepted method for going from a language that uses a personal name for I to one that uses I, because that would be a linguistics question.

However, if the convention is language specific, then it's on topic.

Answer 3

As mr-shiny-and-new points out in a comment, the question Andrew Leach asks about is too basic for the site: it suffices to say "nobody speaks that way in English".

The General Reference close reason means the question is too basic for the site, but there's only one criterion:

This question is too basic; it can be definitively and permanently answered by a single link to a standard internet reference source designed specifically to find that type of information.

This sole criterion for identifying a question as too basic is limiting. There are millions of basic errors: combinations of words that fall in the category of "nobody speaks that way". Very few of these idiosyncratic combinations are likely to have been explained by a reference source. Hence most of them cannot be closed with a reason of "too basic".

Such questions can be closed Too Localized or Not Really A Question; however, a categorization of Too Basic would be more helpful to the OP. It would be nice to see General Reference retitled Too Basic and described as:

This question is too basic and/or can be definitively and permanently answered by a single link to a standard internet reference source designed specifically to find that type of information.