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

If you go to, you get

not constructive

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, see the FAQ for guidance.

which links to itself. Can't the link go to something with more than one paragraph on what's meant by "not constructive", and why they aren't appropriate for Stack Overflow / Stack Exchange sites?

share|improve this question
Funny thing about /faq#close is not only that it provides no further info than repeating the close notifications, but that it also links to itself four times. Recursive madness is recursive madness is... – Yannis Jun 21 '12 at 0:55
Did you mean: Recursion? – Ben Brocka Jun 21 '12 at 1:01

Some might argue that the links were designed to just refer back to the master FAQ; however, the section on on-topic questions is even more misleading.

The section that says:

Read more about closed questions here.

is even more misleading, as it explicitly suggests that it links to some detailed information, yet it just loops you back to the top.

In my opinion, there is some housecleaning that could be done here to make this less confusing. Perhaps the SE team could link to I Move to Close This Question or Real Questions Have Answers or something that goes into more detail than a circular reference.

share|improve this answer

I was about to ask this, it's still present now, extremely confusing and the links adds no value.

Why not link it to What is a "closed" or “on hold” question? rather than have the circular link:

See the faq recursion

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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