We can have up to three custom close reasons offered when voting to close a question. (More can be added by request if there is a demonstrated, pressing need.) Do we have any situations arising often enough to justify a custom close reason yet?

Note that we don't need to use these, they are there for if we find a use for them and aren't going to get taken away just because we don't put anything in them straight away!

Edit: I've removed my examples as no-one can vote on examples and they might confuse people into thinking they were already being added.

  • $\begingroup$ Ideally each custom close reason will link to a meta post for further explanation, so let's try to include those here too. $\endgroup$ – Monica Cellio Nov 3 '14 at 12:39
  • $\begingroup$ @MonicaCellio Agreed. However, we can always make one to describe the rationale behind each, and for policy that may sometimes be better. So I wouldn't sweat it too much if there isn't a great meta post describing the rationale behind the specific close reason yet. $\endgroup$ – user Nov 3 '14 at 13:03
  • $\begingroup$ Oh yes, we can write them later if needed. I think we may have some already, so just saying to link then if you have links handy - saves work later. (On phone right now or would help more. ) $\endgroup$ – Monica Cellio Nov 3 '14 at 15:29
  • Ideas Generation : This come up on a semi regular basis, and is indicated by a question that has "something happen". Often a list answer and opinion based.

Split into three answers as suggested (Feel free to add examples)

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I think this one at least has received enough upvotes to warrant inclusion. Do we have a meta post that fits? $\endgroup$ – user Nov 10 '14 at 9:44
  • $\begingroup$ How about this one? $\endgroup$ – Shokhet Nov 11 '14 at 5:54
  • Plot Writing : This is fairly close to Too Localized, but at least gives a specific reason as to why we close it. Note that Writers.SE does not accept plot questions either, so this is not a redirect (which already exists)

Split into three answers as suggested (Feel free to add examples)

  • $\begingroup$ I think Ideas Generation and Plot Writing are almost the same thing, probably not worth taking up 2 slots $\endgroup$ – Liath Nov 3 '14 at 11:01
  • $\begingroup$ @Liath I disagree but I see your point. I think the close text needs to be different for these things though. $\endgroup$ – Mourdos Nov 3 '14 at 11:10
  • $\begingroup$ Wasn't there a "too story-based" close reason? If yes then this is almost synonymous. $\endgroup$ – G0BLiN Dec 27 '20 at 18:44

Is it Possible?

There are quite a lot of low quality questions where people have an idea which they want to know if it's possible. While I don't have a problem with this in particular - I've certainly as asked them but I think it's a trend of some poor quality questions.

  • Is it possible to settle on the moon?
  • Is it possible to fly to another solar system?
  • Is it possible intelligent life could evolve on the seabed?

Perhaps these are already covered by "Too Broad" but it's the type of question where "I want to get the moon and I want you to work out how to do it".

Please suggest edits for a better name for this!

  • 5
    $\begingroup$ reality-check is allowed, so its not a problem with these kinds of questions. I think too broad already covers this. $\endgroup$ – Mourdos Nov 3 '14 at 11:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mourdos yeah, I'm not happy with the description... it was more of a style of some poor questions I don't think there's anything wrong with the question type itself! $\endgroup$ – Liath Nov 3 '14 at 11:24
  • $\begingroup$ If we have a lot of reality-check question being too broad, is it worth using a warning instead? A warning is a message that is visible to the question writer when they select the tag. $\endgroup$ – Mourdos Nov 3 '14 at 11:25
  • $\begingroup$ @Mourdos to be honest I think it's fine as it is, I think the reasons we have already cover it pretty well. $\endgroup$ – Liath Nov 3 '14 at 11:26
  • Lack of Basic Research: The official answer to this is to downvote, but I've seen a number of these and people don't seem to understand that this is SE policy that the questioner should have done some basic research before asking a question.

Split into three answers as suggested (Feel free to add examples)

  • $\begingroup$ ... This particular answer is a great example of what you are supposed to do with lack of basic research - the intended operation is down-vote. (I kid for irony's sake, but this answer...shows lack of basic research.) $\endgroup$ – Tritium21 Nov 9 '14 at 13:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Tritium21 Try reading that first line again. Its a doozy I know, but that is the bit that shows that the answer has actually been research. Suggesting doing something different to standard policy != lack of research. $\endgroup$ – Mourdos Nov 9 '14 at 15:56
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Actually @Tritium21, on meta sites downvoting generally indicates disagreement, particularly in [discussion] questions. $\endgroup$ – user Nov 10 '14 at 9:45

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .