This question was marked and closed as a duplicate: Ubuntu Server 20.04.4 LTS is unable to detect Wi-Fi adapter
The closure pointed to this as the duplicate: My wireless/WiFi connection does not work. What information is needed to diagnose the issue?
Now, I happen to agree that the answer there is quite good, however, it doesn’t answer the original question, unable to detect wifi adapter; it is a request to post additional diagnostic details.
Please see: https://askubuntu.com/help/duplicates where it clearly says: “In general, the original question must have an answer…”
In my opinion, a request for additional information is not an answer. The additional information, if provided, may or may not lead to an answer, but is not an answer on its face.
What shall we do when a question is closed by a purported duplicate that is not actually an answer but a request for more information?
Shall we vote to reopen and note our conclusion or something else?