Timeline for Why are questions no longer titled as questions?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 21, 2013 at 20:41 | comment | added | Aditya | I whole-heartedly agree with your point and have edited a lot of titles since this Meta Post. But this question on Meta.SE seems to be against it - How do I write a good title? Just for reference. | |
| Jan 7, 2013 at 21:29 | answer | added | Flimm | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jan 4, 2013 at 0:31 | comment | added | Mochan | I'm not calling upon you to help clean this, but if you read all but one of the answers, I think you'll find many people - especially people with a big influence on the community, and know what they're talking about - agree with me. It's up to you if you wish to help or not. | |
| Jan 3, 2013 at 16:26 | comment | added | user6658 | The issue isn't about clarity, it's about ensuring a so-called 'proper' formatting of titles. Many of those titles in the screenshot could benefit with better clarity but say what the problem is. Your proposal to fix the first, second, and third items makes the title LESS informative. But if you want to spend your life rewording posts such that they have that question mark at the end, then have at you. | |
| Jan 3, 2013 at 7:56 | comment | added | Mochan | I feel that it is not pedantic to make the site more orderly and clear. I have nothing else to argue since I have already portrayed my opinion above. Read it if you have complaints. | |
| Jan 3, 2013 at 2:19 | comment | added | user6658 | Auser has a problem - so long as the problem is accurately portrayed there is no need for syntactical pedantry. | |
| Jan 2, 2013 at 16:57 | answer | added | Timo Kluck | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 2, 2013 at 12:13 | comment | added | Mochan | I beg to disagree. With all due respect, I personally believe that a question and answer site, questions should be asked. The description is there to explain the question in more detail. Instead of asking the question in the description, I find it more fitting to describe the problem - because that is what a description does. Does it not? (I have already posted this comment to you, however I feel that in case someone thinks the same thing, I will not have to repeat my opinion ^-^) | |
| Jan 1, 2013 at 15:32 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 8, 2013 at 3:00 | |||||
| Jan 1, 2013 at 15:13 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | Yeech. No, question titles do not have to be questions. | |
| Jan 1, 2013 at 15:13 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | possible duplicate of Could a suggestion appear when users type a non-question title? | |
| Dec 30, 2012 at 16:03 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/AskUbuntu/status/285415945747443712 | ||
| Dec 28, 2012 at 6:43 | history | edited | Mochan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 13 characters in body
|
| Dec 28, 2012 at 5:50 | comment | added | Mochan | @vasa1, I think changing the title is a substantial edit and would not be rejected. However, if the body of the post can be improved in any sense - that should be done too. Edit the title, and body also if acceptable. | |
| Dec 28, 2012 at 5:41 | comment | added | user25656 | See Fast Installation Option for Windows which is otherwise a decent question. With my rep, if I edit the question to read "Is there a fast or minimal installation option for Wubi?", I'll see this: "We welcome all constructive edits, but please make them substantial. Avoid trivial, tiny one-letter edits unless absolutely necessary." So, just for guidance in future cases, could someone tell me if the change I suggest will be acceptable? Or, is the only test whether the edit is ultimately accepted? | |
| Dec 28, 2012 at 2:21 | comment | added | user25656 | @Eliah Kagan, Sorry I wasn't clear. It's not that my edits were rejected. I'm referring to the pop-up that appears for those of us with lower rep: this pop-up reminds us not to make trivial edits. | |
| Dec 28, 2012 at 0:33 | history | edited | Mochan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
markup
|
| Dec 27, 2012 at 23:59 | history | edited | Mochan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
editing and markups
|
| Dec 27, 2012 at 23:36 | comment | added | Mochan | I agree, @EliahKagan. It seems like a whole lot of work though - doesn't it? Even if we did correct past questions to a moderate level - what is to stop future askers from continuing this cycle? I certainly don't want to edit each and every question when someone can be doing it themselves. | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 18:40 | comment | added | Eliah Kagan | @vasa1 I'm not a moderator, but it seems to me that if reviewers are rejecting edits that fix a poorly written non-question title so it's a well-written question title, then there should be a meta question specifically about that. Even if an edit just changes the title, I think it's not "too minor" if the effect of that change is more than minor. However, one should of course also look at the body of questions when editing them, and see if there are any improvements that can be made there at the same time. | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 17:36 | comment | added | user25656 | I fixed those questions of mine that weren't framed as questions. But what about questions of others if only a trivial edit is involved? Aren't we expressly asked or told to desist from such edits? | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 16:56 | answer | added | Jorge Castro | timeline score: 7 | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 13:53 | answer | added | Flimm | timeline score: 8 | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 12:06 | answer | added | Marco CeppiMod | timeline score: 17 | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 11:55 | comment | added | jrg Mod | +1, this is starting to become a problem. And side note: 99% of meta is more "X is broken, please fix" than "X is broken, fix please?" | |
| Dec 27, 2012 at 10:50 | history | edited | Mochan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added details and removed text
|
| Dec 27, 2012 at 10:21 | history | asked | Mochan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |