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

This question already has an answer here:

Just a quick request to reopen this question which has been closed as not constructive.

How do I access Oracle from Python?

The votes to close fail the the objective criteria for "not constructive":

  • "We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise"

Both facts and references are specified in the answer. Regarding specific expertise, I discovered that I'm in the top contributor list for both Oracle and cx_Oracle.

  • "but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion."

None of these events have occurred since the question was asked in 2008, so I think it's safe to assume they won't happen in the future.

One of the strengths of the SO system is that there are objective criteria laid out for each of the reasons for closing a question. Since the specified criteria do not apply to this question, I am asking for votes for the question to be restored to opened status.

(note) This question was previously closed as "not a real question" and promptly reopened after review.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by ben is uǝq backwards, Andrew Barber, Bo Persson, Josh Caswell, Rory Feb 19 '13 at 20:29

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

I would go for not a real question but it should stay closed anyway. – juergen d Feb 19 '13 at 19:58
For a second there, I thought it was January 31st again – LittleBobbyTables Feb 19 '13 at 20:05
My reopen vote is still there, and I still have no idea why anyone closed it. It's a very specific question, that is obviously answerable. Though looking at Bart's answer, I can see where the old version/redit plays into it. – Lance Roberts Feb 19 '13 at 20:05
How is this not a dupe of your previous question where everyone explained their reasons for immediately re-closing the question and no-one leaped out to defend it? – ben is uǝq backwards Feb 19 '13 at 20:07
I actually wonder why you want it being reopend so bad – juergen d Feb 19 '13 at 20:30
@ben, It's not a dupe, since the original request was to reopen an erroneous "not a real question" closing. As soon as it was reopened, several people cast votes to close as "not constructive"; again erroneously, since it meets none of the objective criteria for that reason. – Mark Harrison Feb 19 '13 at 21:18
@juergend, regarding why: it's incorrectly closed according to the objective criteria. I have my suspicion as to the actual reason several people voted to close, but I'll let them bring that up if they so desire. – Mark Harrison Feb 19 '13 at 21:20
Did you actually read any of the comments or answers on your other question @Mark? People say they're going to close it (including me) stating their reasons in full. There's no reason for any "suspicions". The outcome of your previous question was a community consensus that it remain closed. Therefore this is a dupe of that question, whatever your specific gripe with the current close reason might be. – ben is uǝq backwards Feb 19 '13 at 21:22
I disagree with your conclusion regarding concensus. It was closed, and reopened almost immediately. You then voted to close based on an erroneous (if you take the SO criteria seriously) reason. It almost immediately received two open votes, and I'm confident that it would quickly receive the other three if you had not voted to close this question, thereby making it invisible(?) in the question stream. – Mark Harrison Feb 19 '13 at 21:34
@Mark, it only received one of those re-open votes. The other you gained today... I've got a lot to say on this subject but I don't think that this is the place. I've given my view in my answer and we've commented back and forth quite a bit; it's your prerogative to disagree. Let's leave it at that. – ben is uǝq backwards Feb 19 '13 at 21:48
@ben, agreed, and thanks for your thoughtful feedback. – Mark Harrison Feb 19 '13 at 21:58

This question went through some history. The original question was:

How do I get started with cx_Oracle?

That's it. Nothing more. Focusing purely on the question, that was a pretty lousy question for SO. Or at least by the standards we now tend to uphold. You brought this to Meta to be reopened, and you changed it. And quite dramatically so:

I would like to access Oracle from Python. Is there a PEP 249 (Python Database API) compliant package to do so?

I have made my issues with that particular edit clear in your previous Meta question. While still in line with your accepted self-answer, you more or less seem to have invalidated the other answers. What's more, you've now stumbled into list/recommendation/shopping territory. Another category of questions which (by now) are considered to be off-topic for SO. These are most often closed as "not constructive".

So I can't conclude anything else than that the question is appropriately closed. I see no reason for it to be reopened in its current form.

share|improve this answer
Asking for a PEP249-compliant interface for Oracle is unlikely to solicit a list of responses because it's unlikely that there will be multiple such libraries. There isn't that much room for variation while complying with the API, so users are most likely to have settled on a common package. Identifying this package is the first thing I would like to do if I were starting with Oracle in Python, and the way the question is phrased now is a suitable way to do it. If I were posting it today I would pad it out to deter close voters, but the question doesn't really need more than it has. – Jeremy Banks Feb 19 '13 at 20:24
@Bart, this is not a list question. There's exactly one answer. Since you are unable to come up with a second package, your conclusion is invalid. If you persist in your conclusion, you should clearly indicate that your evaluation is subjective and not supported by the objective criteria for "not constructive". – Mark Harrison Feb 19 '13 at 21:16
So now we're saying that (contrived) recommendation questions are just fine if the author knows that there will be only ever be a particular single answer he knows beforehand? – Bart Feb 19 '13 at 21:27
@bart, it's a useful question, and answer. The two together have received 70+ upvotes. I don't understand why you focus on the authorship; you should consider strictly the content. Since you've already acknowledged that the subject matter is out of your area of expertise, I'm at a loss why you're so adamant about closing it. – Mark Harrison Feb 19 '13 at 21:32
@MarkHarrison And I have explained to you before that the content might be useful, but the question is simply bad. And that is what was judged. The question asked. The question got closed (and justifiably so IMO) but the content is still there. I see no need to reopen it. – Bart Feb 19 '13 at 21:34

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