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

I am getting tired of people who find a question that is:

  • not subjective
  • not off-topic
  • not intended to have the community edit it


  • has the potential to gain many upvotes

and say that it should be converted to community wiki or they will threaten to close it. It seems like they are just jealous of not being able to come up with a good question that can gain many upvotes.

Community wiki is not to balance out reputation for jealous people. Community wiki is for questions that suit community input through editing from low-reputation users as well as those past the typical editing threshold.

Can we add this to the FAQ so that people stop nagging for community wiki?

share|improve this question
Link or it didn't happen. (^_^) – ЯegDwight Sep 24 '10 at 11:49
It is a part of the FAQ: What are “Community Wiki” posts? – user149432 Sep 24 '10 at 11:50
The FAQ should state, however, that community wiki shouldn't be used as an excuse by people to stop good questions from getting upvotes. – Delan Azabani Sep 24 '10 at 11:54
Cannot reproduce this. Can you provide a sample? – Piskvor Sep 24 '10 at 11:56 -- the first commenter thinks that subjective equals wiki time. – Delan Azabani Sep 24 '10 at 11:58
Another, independent example: would you prefer coding php using framework or on it's own. – user149432 Sep 24 '10 at 12:01
@Delan your question is subjective and too localized to your situation: it'd probably be better served on Programmers.SE. The appropriate alternative to community wiki would be to close it, not leave it open. – user149432 Sep 24 '10 at 12:02
@Mark I wouldn't call closing an alternative to CW for that. I'd call it the proper course of action. Delan is right that CW should be used for questions that require community interaction, not as a measure to block reputation change or allow an otherwise disallowed question. – Grace Note Sep 24 '10 at 12:40
@Grace I'm in agreement: I was pointing out that Delan's alternative to the inappropriateness of CW—to leave his question alone—was incorrect: the appropriate action is to close. – user149432 Sep 24 '10 at 13:35

In a way I'd say you're right. Questions as subjective as the example you gave should just be closed. No need to bother making them Community Wiki. Your question Where to go now? might be asked on, but I haven't really got a fix on what kinds of questions will get closed on there. You'll just have to try it and see.

share|improve this answer

Those are the very models of a modern subjective question: what language should I learn next and "would you prefer (sic!) coding php using framework or on its own".

From the FAQ:

Avoid asking questions that are subjective, argumentative, or require extended discussion. This is not a discussion board, this is a place for questions that can be answered!

What sort of objective answer do you envision for a question titled "where to go next?" - "second to the right, and straight on till morning"? Or for a question "do you prefer a framework?"

It's perhaps inevitable that your opinion differs from other users', but IMNSHO by complaining about that, you are being slightly too sensitive about your precious rep points.

share|improve this answer
Now everyone upvote this or I'll go to meta.meta.SO to complain that the meta users won't recognize the upvote potential of my answer. – Piskvor Sep 24 '10 at 12:15
Yes, but where is the correlation between subjective and no rep? – Delan Azabani Sep 24 '10 at 12:19
@Delan Azabani: Easy enough: subjective -> close votes -> no rep (as few people vote on closed questions). – Piskvor Sep 24 '10 at 12:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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