Could you please reopen my question? My question is "On which to unload those most unbelievable yet haunting of fairy-tales"
Thank you very much for your help.
-
1Li Xiaodong ask why your question was put on hold. Tell the community you don't understand why your question was put on hold for being too broad. You are only asking about a single phrase, you've shown effort and attempted to resolve the problem.– Mari-Lou AAug 24, 2016 at 10:00
-
1@Mari-LouA I think the best thing here would be to edit this request with your reasoning, to demonstrate to the OP what you think she should do. If you feel awkward about that, then you could make your own Meta post with your rationale about why the question should be re-opened.– Kit Z. Fox ModAug 24, 2016 at 13:35
-
And... it's reopened! Hooray! :)– Mari-Lou AAug 24, 2016 at 13:40
-
1Thank you very much for your help.– Li XiaodongAug 24, 2016 at 14:30
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
When reviewers consider whether to vote to reopen a question, it helps for the request to explain why it should be reopened. Was it closed in error? Was it closed correctly, but you've now addressed the issues (and if so, how did you do that)?
You've asked in the right place, and the community is usually keen to help. It really lightens the load for reviewers to be able to just confirm that your reasons are valid, rather than to have to wade through the edit trail to work it out. This makes it more likely that a request accompanied by a valid reason would be taken seriously than one that doesn't.
Consider the following example if you believe that you have addressed the issues:
The Meta post lists the question and the reason for closure, then says what's changed to address the issue that led to the closure.
If your request to reopen is because you disagree with the reason for closure, consider the following example:
It lists the question and mentions the reason for closure, then explains why the reason didn't apply.
-
-
@LiXiaodong It's not about the number of questions, but about why you think the question should be reopened. Please consider the information I've added to my answer.– LawrenceAug 24, 2016 at 9:53
-
1The "problem" is I think the question is on topic, it was just formatted poorly, it looked confusing, it was difficult to tell where the cited extract ended and where the OP's questions began. Aug 24, 2016 at 10:13
-
3@Mari-LouA I'm inclined to agree; I have no quarrel with you on this. But I would like you to consider this: would you think the OP's Meta request is worth pursuing if you weren't already familiar with the question on the main site? I haven't yet down-voted this Meta question, but I do think it's a bit thin.– LawrenceAug 24, 2016 at 10:19
-
1
-
1@KitZ.Fox Cleaned up there are still at least three questions here. 'yet', 'haunting', 'the most .... of ...', and probably some more. Classically immediately closable. And at least 'yet' and 'haunting' are general reference. Also, this request, as Lawrence notices, doesn't give any reason to reopen.– MitchAug 24, 2016 at 13:06
-
1
-
-
@Mitch Although we normally prefer one question per post, I don't think it serves either the OP's or the site's interests to split these into multiple posts. If the objection is on the grounds that the questions and answers in the post are about the basic mechanics of the language, then this looks like a candidate for migration to Learners.– LawrenceAug 24, 2016 at 22:44
-
-
@KitZ.Fox Thank you. I'm not sure what fixes you're referring to, though.– LawrenceAug 24, 2016 at 22:48
-
I meant that if the problem is with formatting and too many questions, then the question could be edited for formatting and to narrow the scope. I misread your comments earlier as referring to the main question, not the Meta one, but I like what you did with your answer. I think that's helpful.– Kit Z. Fox ModAug 24, 2016 at 23:47
-
@KitZ.Fox Ah, that makes more sense to me now. Thanks for clarifying.– LawrenceAug 25, 2016 at 0:00