I just noticed the new wording for closed questions, which I happen to like, because it encourages the user to improve their post. Example:

Off Topic
Questions on Stack Overflow are expected to relate to programming or software development within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

Another example, the "Not Constructive" close reason:

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.

Notice that the links point to the "Close" portion of the FAQ, which merely restates the close reason wording that has been inserted into the OP's post. The user has already seen this information, and is shown all of the other close reasons, which have no relevance in the context of the OP's post.

The real information for improving his post is located on this page. To get there, the user has to click on the original link in his question, and then click on another link to get to the page that tells him how to fix his post.

Rather than linking to https://stackoverflow.com/faq#close, the close reason should link to https://stackoverflow.com/questions/how-to-ask instead.


I don't know if I agree with this.

The first para of the linked section, which will be at the TOP of the user's browser when they click on https://stackoverflow.com/faq#close

Questions that are not a good fit for this site may be voted closed by experienced community members. Closed questions cannot be answered, but are eligible for improvement (and eventual re-opening) through editing, voting, and commenting. See How to Ask for guidance on editing your question to improve it.

That's.. pretty clear, and it gives context to "what the heck does closing a question even mean?" as well as providing all the possible close reasons, which gives them a decent overview of the many ways things can go wrong with a question, and by implication, what we accept here.

| improve this answer | |
  • 2
    I've been here awhile, so maybe that's why this is causing me so much cognitive dissonance, but my first reaction was "WTH is this? I've seen this already." I almost missed the "How to Ask" link; I thought I'd already clicked the link that led me to the "how can you improve your post" information. There's nothing I find more irritating on the Web than clicking on a link and winding up somewhere else than where I expected to be. – user102937 Jun 7 '12 at 15:04
  • 4
    In short, I believe that "See How to Ask for guidance on editing your question to improve it." should be in the OP's question directly, not two clicks away. Doing so better achieves the goal of "just in time" documentation, and increases the likelihood that the information will actually get read. – user102937 Jun 7 '12 at 15:05