I want to be clear that in general, I understand and support editing questions. Especially with new users who might not be familiar with how SE is supposed to work, or to assist those who may not have a very good command of the English language.
But should there be a limit to the extent we want to do this? If someone has shown themselves to be implacably unwilling to follow site rules, do we really want to keep fixing their questions up ad nauseum? Not just one or three or ten questions but dozens in a row. All with no preliminary research, little to no attempt at being on topic, far too broad in scope or vague or otherwise incomprehensible.
When someone has steadfastly refused to comply with the site rules like that, I think we should just close/delete the question and move on. If there's a potentially good topic, I would rather someone interested repost it as a serious question instead.
Where does Meta stand on this?
(Not that I think simply fixing the English and adding some pictures is really enough by themselves to save a question.)
@FelixGoldberg's comment here highlights part of why I think this is problematic (not saying that Mr Goldberg did anything wrong, but). I don't really think that spamming a series of delete-worthy questions, then waiting for someone to fix them for you, ought to be a plausible way of gaining rep (not important for the internet points themselves, but for the powers that gets unlocked).
