Timeline for How can we support requests for research portals?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:47 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://history.stackexchange.com/ with https://history.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 10, 2014 at 10:52 | comment | added | yannis | If you have a clear idea on how these questions could work, you should post an answer here @Drux. Sometimes, all it takes to convince the community is a good Meta answer... | |
| Mar 10, 2014 at 10:45 | comment | added | Drux | @YannisRizos I wouldn't welcome just any links to conspiracy web sites, or similar. I'm thinking of references that identify published books or otherwise web sites where it's clear who is behind (e.g. bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01dh5yg). And whoever posts links should add short summaries (e.g. similar to this format economist.com/news/books-and-arts/…) to put a little bit of her reputation (whatever that may be worth) at stake. Haven't witnessed the other attempts, so I may be naive. | |
| Mar 10, 2014 at 10:34 | comment | added | yannis | (cont...) On the flip side, Math.SE is doing just fine with allowing them, and we have a brand new site (SR.SE) that's all about recommendations. I wouldn't mind if we gave them a try on History as well, and decide for our own if they work for us. I'm just not very confident we'll succeed. | |
| Mar 10, 2014 at 10:34 | comment | added | yannis | @Drux As a quick example, Stack Overflow & Programmers (and I suspect other sites as well) have custom close reasons just for this general type of questions (you don't get a custom close reason unless the whole category is a serious burden on the site). There's also the canonical "real questions have answers, not items or ideas or opinions" blog post. | |
| Mar 8, 2014 at 19:30 | comment | added | Drux | @YannisRizos could you please point to or describe some of the questions for reference material that did not work out on other sites? | |
| Mar 7, 2014 at 10:49 | comment | added | yannis | Nothing inherently wrong with your question, and it's certainly on the high end of the spectrum quality wise. However, if we are going to widen our scope to include recommendation questions, I think we should first be fairly certain that we can handle the low end ones. And having seen the general category fail again and again on several SE sites, I can't say I feel confident we'll ever be able to sufficiently moderate them (within the confines of the SE platform). | |
| Mar 7, 2014 at 10:47 | comment | added | yannis | The problem with the general category of questions is that more often than not they attract more extremely low quality answers (including outright spam) than we can (or care to) cope with. Furthermore, most recommendation / "gimme a list" questions tend to be extremely low quality themselves, with their most common problem being a profound lack of prior research / effort. | |
| Mar 7, 2014 at 7:25 | history | answered | Leon Conrad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |