Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

Stack Exchange 2.0 sites have "not a real question" as closing reason; the only exception is this very site.

screenshot taken from meta.drupal.stackexchange.com

May this closing reason be re-added?

I have never seen feature requests, or bug reports being closed as not a real question simply for the fact they are request, or reports; if they have been closed as such is because it was difficult to tell what was being asked. I think the community on Meta Stack Overflow already shown to know when this closing reason should be used; the fact that in the meta sites I visit the same closing reason has never been used for feature requests should mean users know when the closing reason should be used.

share|improve this question
    
Plenty of things here aren't questions, and are perfectly valid... – Nick Craver May 7 '12 at 15:07
    
@NickCraver That would apply to other meta sites as well. I don't think bug reports, or feature requests would be closed as "not a real question" just for the fact they are bug reports, or feature requests; if that were to happen, they would be clearly closed for the wrong reason. – kiamlaluno May 7 '12 at 15:19
3  
then the correct request would be to remove it from those child metas as well, would it not? The criteria seems pretty straight-forward to me, it shouldn't be offered as a close reason if it's not a reason to close the question. – Nick Craver May 7 '12 at 15:21
    
@NickCraver If that closing reason is removed, what other closing reason should be used? Should "not constructive" be used? – kiamlaluno May 7 '12 at 15:26
2  
Absolutely, if someone brings a rant here on meta with no real problem, no solution and is doing something completely not constructive, that's a valid close reason...it gets used for precisely that reason fairly regularly. – Nick Craver May 7 '12 at 15:27
1  
@NickCraver I kind of miss noise or pointless, but it is a kinder .. gentler Meta after all. – Tim Post May 8 '12 at 13:40
    
I want to close this as not a real question. What a Catch-22. – BoltClock's a Unicorn May 8 '12 at 13:42
    
@BoltClock'saUnicorn You could also close it as off-topic; that doesn't mean it is off-topic. – kiamlaluno May 8 '12 at 13:44
up vote 2 down vote accepted

There are a lot of things that are valid on this site that aren't questions.

These include:

  • Bug reports
  • Feature requests
  • Stuff that you need to bring to attention to moderators (when flagging doesn't help)
  • Discussion about a topic
share|improve this answer
    
"saying that the question doesn't fit into any category that meta is for" That would be "off topic", no? – BoltClock's a Unicorn May 8 '12 at 13:42
1  
@BoltClock'saUnicorn Yeah. My english isn't great. Somebody can edit that to whatever they want (don't vandalise it though). – Anish Gupta May 8 '12 at 13:44
    
It's not an issue with language, but if something doesn't fit what meta is intended for, what else would it be if not "off topic"? – BoltClock's a Unicorn May 8 '12 at 13:45
    
@BoltClock'saUnicorn Good point. I was thinking almost the same thing when I was writing it. I was hoping someone would edit that to make it sound better. But I'll just delete it now. – Anish Gupta May 8 '12 at 13:47
    
If this is the argument, then "not constructive" could be applied for all the discussions, as it says, "this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion." I expect the community to choose the right closing reason for the right questions; differently, questions that are on-topic could be closed as off-topic. – kiamlaluno May 8 '12 at 13:48
    
@BoltClock'saUnicorn Is discussion valid in Meta SO? – Anish Gupta May 8 '12 at 13:52
    
@kiamlaluno It's basically copied from SO. I believe that you are allowed discussion in MSO. There is a discussion tag for that. It should be changed. – Anish Gupta May 8 '12 at 13:55
    
@Anish Gupta: Sure. – BoltClock's a Unicorn May 8 '12 at 13:58
    
@kiamlaluno: See meta.stackexchange.com/questions/107073/… – BoltClock's a Unicorn May 8 '12 at 13:59
    
@moguzalpenel_hak I meant that bit which had something like "maybe it should be changed to [...]". – Anish Gupta May 8 '12 at 14:01
    
@BoltClock'saUnicorn I have read that before. What I am arguing here is the argument used in this answer. – kiamlaluno May 8 '12 at 14:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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