Return to Answer

My position—and I'm adamant about this—is that useful, high-quality answers should never be deleted even if the question is closed.

The question got to the point where a truly great answer was posted to it. Our primary goal here at Stack Exchange is to build a knowledge base for readers as well as to provide a reliable venue for high-quality Q&A. The fact that a question is not appropriate for our site does not mean that we should sacrifice good content for the sake of cleanliness. This is not the first time I've dealt with this issue.

I'm of the opinion that questions that are closed and have remained on the site unchanged long enough to otherwise be candidates for deletion that have a high-quality answer(s) and lots of views should be historically locked instead. This will prevent any activity from occurring on the question and answers but ensure that the content remains accessible for the benefit of people researching on Google.

That said, if a question can be edited to make it more readable, even if it isn't possible to bring the question to the point where it can be reopened, then it can and should be edited. In cases like this, the possibility of editing should be considered before the question is locked.

For more on this, see this Meta Stack Overflow question: "Did we really have to delete this 80-vote community wiki answer after three years?". In a mod's words:

We do not delete good content. We do not delete good content.

My position—and I'm adamant about this—is that useful, high-quality answers should never be deleted even if the question is closed.

The question got to the point where a truly great answer was posted to it. Our primary goal here at Stack Exchange is to build a knowledge base for readers as well as to provide a reliable venue for high-quality Q&A. The fact that a question is not appropriate for our site does not mean that we should sacrifice good content for the sake of cleanliness. This is not the first time I've dealt with this issue.

I'm of the opinion that questions that are closed and have remained on the site unchanged long enough to otherwise be candidates for deletion that have a high-quality answer(s) and lots of views should be historically locked instead. This will prevent any activity from occurring on the question and answers but ensure that the content remains accessible for the benefit of people researching on Google.

That said, if a question can be edited to make it more readable, even if it isn't possible to bring the question to the point where it can be reopened, then it can and should be edited. In cases like this, the possibility of editing should be considered before the question is locked.

For more on this, see this Meta Stack Overflow question: "Did we really have to delete this 80-vote community wiki answer after three years?". In a mod's words:

We do not delete good content. We do not delete good content.

My position—and I'm adamant about this—is that useful, high-quality answers should never be deleted even if the question is closed.

The question got to the point where a truly great answer was posted to it. Our primary goal here at Stack Exchange is to build a knowledge base for readers as well as to provide a reliable venue for high-quality Q&A. The fact that a question is not appropriate for our site does not mean that we should sacrifice good content for the sake of cleanliness. This is not the first time I've dealt with this issue.

I'm of the opinion that questions that are closed and have remained on the site unchanged long enough to otherwise be candidates for deletion that have a high-quality answer(s) and lots of views should be historically locked instead. This will prevent any activity from occurring on the question and answers but ensure that the content remains accessible for the benefit of people researching on Google.

That said, if a question can be edited to make it more readable, even if it isn't possible to bring the question to the point where it can be reopened, then it can and should be edited. In cases like this, the possibility of editing should be considered before the question is locked.

For more on this, see this Meta Stack Overflow question: "Did we really have to delete this 80-vote community wiki answer after three years?". In a mod's words:

We do not delete good content. We do not delete good content.

My position—and I'm adamant about this—is that useful, high-quality answers should never be deleted even if the question is closed.

The question got to the point where a truly great answer was posted to it. Our primary goal here at Stack Exchange is to build a knowledge base for readers as well as to provide a reliable venue for high-quality Q&A. The fact that a question is not appropriate for our site does not mean that we should sacrifice good content for the sake of cleanliness. This is not the first time I've dealt with this issue.

I'm of the opinion that questions that are closed and have remained on the site unchanged long enough to otherwise be candidates for deletion that have a high-quality answer(s) and lots of views should be historically locked instead. This will prevent any activity from occurring on the question and answers but ensure that the content remains accessible for the benefit of people researching on Google.

That said, if a question can be edited to make it more readable, even if it isn't possible to bring the question to the point where it can be reopened, then it can and should be edited. In cases like this, the possibility of editing should be considered before the question is locked.

For more on this, see this Meta Stack Overflow question: "Did we really have to delete this 80-vote community wiki answer after three years?". In a mod's words:

We do not delete good content. We do not delete good content.