Can we please stop voting to close a question just because the question is short?

Question

I have seen many times that somebody voted to close short questions (and probably downvoted the questions as well), even though the OP made clear that there had been good attempts. This thread is the most recent one I saw. While I do not know the real reason that the question has been voted to close, my bet is that somebody looked at the question and thought it was too short to show enough attempt. However, if you really read the question, you would know that the OP must have made it very far in solving the original question. Therefore, I would like to ask you to really read the question before deciding to close it. Sometimes, a short question does show enough effort.

Here is another short question with a close vote that I think is premature. While the OP of this thread should have shown more, to answer the main question why the OP did not get the same result as the textbook (or whichever resources the OP was using) does not require knowing the OP's attempt. By just looking at the information the OP gave, you could see that the OP had actually solved the problem, but did not realize it.

Here is yet another short question with a close vote. The OP properly formatted the question. The OP also supplied a full attempt, despite it being wrong. The only thing the OP should have done more was to add a "proof-verification" or "solution-verification" tag. Yet, there is a vote to close because it is missing context or other details. I am not quite sure what other context should be added to this rather simple question.

This would be my last example for this META question. I only wanted to supply more examples as Xander Henderson had requested. (This is not an attempt to spark another round of heated debate.)

Answer 1

The question raises a valid point, but does so in a non-optimal way.

Can we please stop voting to close a question just because the question is short?

Yes, sure. Everyone agrees. Let's move on. Yet, wait. As discussed in comments there is an issue in any specific case. Was it really "just because"?

Actually, framing it as you did will invite others to contest that it was "just because." This will likely not lead to anything constructive.

Here is one principle: It is first and foremost the job of the person that asks the question to craft a question post that makes it easy and clear to appreciate and to understand. If this is not the case, then it can be closed.

That said, there are obviously limits to this, and some users actually might at times resort a bit too much to heuristics and possibly vote on things where they did not make a reasonable effort to understand the post. At the same time I do not think it is reasonable to impose as the limit that users first need to solve the problem to see where the intermediate step lies and if it makes sense.

Adopting the above principle has the drawback that we arguably miss some good questions because of this. Because it is a fact that there are not few people out there that are quite competent in mathematics yet have difficult to express it (in English).

The drawback can be mitigated though. Those that care about the questions can give advice how to improve the post (or within limits improve it themselves). Ideally they would do this before the question is closed, then the question might not be closed to begin with. In any case it can be reopened.

This post might be a bit meandering, so what's my point?

Maybe it is a call for pragmatism. The time spend to call out users that close "just because" the question is short or "just because" whatever, might be better spent on improving questions.

If this happens I would encourage those that close to show some appreciation towards the gesture and maybe close one of the 137 other questions of the day that still should be closed not to speak about the 125273 on the site.

The flip-side is that those that improve should do so out of genuine interest in the question, and not in an effort to undercut those that had closed or were in the process of closing.

Answer 2

This (second) answer is specifically about the newly added paragraphe and the question mentioned there:

The question in its original form:

Find the second solution. First solution is 1/(1-x) .Solve by Frobenius Method

question is x(1-x)y''+2(1-2x)y'-2y=0 please give complete solution.The first soltion i am able to get is 1/(1-x) . Other solution is 1/x but i am getting -1/x(1-x).

This got one vote to close before you drew attention to it here (now at three). And, this means that we are too strict? I don't think so.

I agree that the post contains something that can be salvaged. If there are users that want to salvage something that's fine. But this type of post, as is, does not match the standards of the site and thus can and should be closed unless it gets improved. There is nothing wrong with this and failing to do so degrades the quality of the site.

Yes, in this case, given the edits and your answer it is now maybe basically alright, and it is in a way nice that you put in the effort.

But as a rule such posts can be closed. Clearly the poster can do a bit better than this. Why should we cater to this? We should not. It is ultimately a disservice for the site and arguably even the poster.

Answer 3

General concerns.

You have a reasonable concern. Thank you for posting the question with a typical example.

In the (almost) daily list of questions-to-be-closed/deleted in the CURED (formerly abbreviated as CRUDE) chat room since early 2018, the initiator once said clearly in a public conversation that

I search for very short posts.

There are indeed many “short” questions that are closed and/or deleted by this room. Not to say that such activities are right or wrong, it is unclear how the list is formed regularly and based on what kind of algorithms ("cure") or judgments if any. But such “searching by length” activities would be certainly a concern for the public.

The particular geometry question.

For the particular geometry question you mentioned, it is indeed very short.

One of the users who voted to close left the following comment under the question:

^{"I have voted to close that question because it lacks context. The asker claims that they have reduced the problem to proving a short statement (which, without seeing how they derived that result, makes me worry that the question is an XY problem). They have not indicated which theorems, results, or definitions are applicable (or allowable, assuming that this is a school assignment."}

Such justifications (assuming good intention) for closing is actually used very often, which causes the over-requirement of the so-called "context". It is nevertheless problematic.

Providing “which theorems, results, or definitions are applicable” can indeed facilitate an answerer to give a desirable answer, it is by no means a must. It is, of course, annoying that one gives an answer but the asker later leaves a comment like “oh, no, my teacher does not allow me to use LHopital, can you do it in another way?” But this question is not such a case.

One way to provide the expected context is to give definitions. For example, it may be very essential to provide the definition of the exponential function $x\mapsto e^x$ since answers to the question may completely depend on the way one defines it. In the linked question, do you seriously think that people who read this question do not know what the definition of “parallel” is? Or what “area” means in this problem?

Under that question, one user wrote “I have voted to close this question because it lacks context. You claim to have written a lot of relations, but you have not reproduced any of them here”.

MSE is a Q&A site. Not a place for taking exams and question box is not an exam paper. Who cares those messy intermediate attempts PROVIDED that the asked attempted to reduce the problem to a simpler one and clearly wrote down what (s)he thought (s)he has reduced?

“This has the potential of being an XY Problem.” in the same comment is invalid. The timeline shows that at 2020-04-28 14:23:31Z an answer was accepted. I do not see the point of using such a reason for voting to close a question after three hours of the accepted answer (2020-04-28 17:47:49Z).

Answer 4

I think people here vote negative and to close the question if it is too difficult for them, I put here quality questions I admit they are difficult and people voted negative after I spent a good time writing them when people vote negative they must give a good reason. What is the point of the site if when you ask a question because the people are unable to answer they vote negative and ask to close it. Does this mean that the site lacks quality and it's not really for the purpose?