4

This question here: Using Firefox, how can I monitor all JavaScript events that are fired?

was deleted by @casperOne about 7 hours ago, without going through the normal close process or getting any close votes.

The question itself was legit and had 3 upvotes. My initial answer had 1 upvote and 24 hours or so ago the OP put a bounty on the question after which I did some more research and updated my answer which got 6 upvotes.

Soon after that the question was removed. I'd like to know why?

Did the OP request it closed to have the bounty refunded perhaps?

There were other upvoted answers on that question and I wanted to refer to those answers again and I also had another answer I wanted to add to the question that would have been very useful.

Is there a way to get the question back, even as a community wiki as it has some good information?

Improve this question
23
  • 9
    Looks like a borderline shopping list / NaRQ to me...
    – animuson StaffMod
    Jul 3, 2012 at 3:25
  • 1
    Not a real question.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Jul 3, 2012 at 3:33
  • 2
    Just to address 'without going through the normal close process or getting any close votes' - a ♦ moderator can cast immediately-binding close and delete votes
    – AakashM
    Jul 3, 2012 at 8:16
  • 27
    Common misconception: upvotes = legitimacy. This is not the case, upvotes = popularity, nothing more. We have massively upvoted questions on Stack Overflow which we have closed and/or deleted because they are not good fits for the site.
    – casperOne
    Jul 3, 2012 at 11:37
  • 4
    Oh, and community wiki is dead.
    – casperOne
    Jul 3, 2012 at 11:38
  • 1
    @casperOne: I don't think that question should remain deleted. It probably did deserve to be closed in its current form, but the question could be edited to something like: "Using Firefox, how can I monitor all JavaScript/jQuery events that are fired? I need to debug a webpage with heavy JavaScript (jQuery). Any tips?". The question then becomes reasonable, and the answer by Moin Zaman still makes sense.
    – thirtydot
    Jul 3, 2012 at 11:58
  • 3
    It's no longer a list question, and it seems well-defined enough to me. What's unclear about "I'm trying to debug X, so how can I monitor Y"?. I never mentioned anything about "programmatic", I just de-emphasised the "gief me addonz" part of the question. You're right that there are quite a few similar questions, here are a couple: stackoverflow.com/questions/3960709 / stackoverflow.com/questions/2741445. In that case, the correct course of action is to undelete the question but close it as a duplicate, or allow the community to do so. Outright deletion is too strong, imho.
    – thirtydot
    Jul 3, 2012 at 13:51
  • 6
    @casperOne, for users with less than 10k rep -- like the OP of the deleted question and the asker of this question -- deletion does equal uneditable. (Except for deleted answers to non-deleted questions, but that's not relevant here.)
    – Pops
    Jul 3, 2012 at 17:57
  • 13
    @casperOne I do not fault you for closing the question, but you should not have deleted it. Immediate deletion is only for egregious cases. In the future, please refrain from deleting questions that might be salvageable until the asker and the community have had time to react to the closure.
    – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil'
    Jul 3, 2012 at 18:21
  • 1
    @NicolBolas I won't go so far to say it's policy, but moderators are expected to clean up things that are egregious when they come across them and it's obvious. If you look at the first revision of this question, it was a question that was NARQ (showing no original research effort) and NC (asking for a list of tips tricks). These questions have pretty much no chance of being worked into something viable, so I made the call and deleted it.
    – casperOne
    Jul 3, 2012 at 23:23
  • 1
    @NicolBolas That said, even in it's current form the question is no longer a product recommendation, but it still shows no original research effort, which is always closed as NARQ when we come across it on the site and what it should be closed as now.
    – casperOne
    Jul 3, 2012 at 23:24
  • 1
    @casperOne: "shows no original research effort, which is always closed as NARQ" It is? I though the way this was handled was with a downvote. The NARQ message certainly doesn't say anything about being closed due to lack of research effort.
    – Nicol Bolas
    Jul 3, 2012 at 23:28
  • 1
    @NicolBolas NARQ is pretty much the standard close reason that's used by the majority of the site to close down questions that show no original research effort. That's not to say that there are questions that need original research effort, but this question could have benefit from some. It's also mentioned in the jmort's answer below.
    – casperOne
    Jul 3, 2012 at 23:29
  • 1
    Wow, the question looks a lot better after all the edits. But still, gsharp should tell us what he tried and why that didn't work. That could at least rule out people repeating things in answers that won't solve the problem... because he already tried it... ;) In my mind, explaining what he did so far could make it a really outstanding question.
    – jmort253
    Jul 4, 2012 at 1:31
  • 3
    Thanks for the great discussion on this. Oh and also for the edit and re-opening of the question. The OP has accepted the answer.
    – Moin Zaman
    Jul 4, 2012 at 8:28

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
17

This looks like a “how to” question, not a shopping question. It's fundamentally asking “How can I see what handled events are fired by my Javascript code?”.

It could use a bit of rewording to satisfy the people who don't take the time to read the question (which includes moderators, who on Stack Overflow do not humanly have that time even if they were willing to spend it). thirtydot's edits look fine.

Closing the question pending a rewording was reasonable, even if I dispute that it should have been closed in its original form. However, the question should not have been deleted. Deleting questions before the asker or the community has had time to react to the closure should only be done in egregious cases (spam, abuse, complete nonsense…). Users with a reputation between 10k and 20k can only delete questions if they have been closed for at least 48 hours, this is a good guideline to follow even if you have the power to delete the question before then.

Improve this answer
29

For those who cannot see the deleted question, here it is for reference purposes:

Firefox addon (or other tool) for event monitoring [closed]

I'm looking for a Firefox Addin or any other tool (can also be commercial, if it doesn't cost the world) that shows me what handled events are fired. I need to debug a webpage with heavy Javascript (jQuery). Any tips?

From the FAQ

You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.

Stack Overflow is hailed by many as a great place to get expert answers to programming problems. The success of Stack Overflow, and the entire Stack Exchange platform, is the result of constant, rigorous monitoring of the material that is posted on the network to ensure that it meets the guidelines for Q&A. Stack Exchange is not a traditional forum, and sometimes this catches people off-guard.

As a result of trial and error, sweat, blood, and tears, the community has learned that there are certain types of questions that just aren't a good fit for the Stack Exchange engine. For example, questions asking for recommendations or those asking for lists of things typically don't work well in our communities.

This particular question can actually be closed under two separate close reasons:

Not a Real Question

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, see the FAQ.

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.

What have you tried?

First, the question is overly broad. The asker doesn't state what he/she tried, what research he/she has already done, or provided details about a specific problem. Chances are, a quick Google search could answer this question, which means it's already been answered. There is no need to ask a question for which an answer already exists on the first page of Google. Stack Exchange strives to be more.

Lists are bad:

Second, the question asks for a list of things, which Stack Exchange is really not setup for. The larger the list grows, the more difficult it is to find the items of true value. It morphs into the classic needle-in-a-haystack problem.

Shopping anyone?

Not only that, but it is essentially a shopping question, which tends to encourage posts that list favorite tools rather than a tool that actually solves a problem. There is really no correct answer, and the post has little value to future visitors. You can read more about this in the article Q&A is Hard, Let's Go Shopping.

Summary:

With that said, closure and deletion aren't designed to make anyone feel bad or tell you your a bad person. Q&A really is hard, and it takes some practice to get it right.

Lastly, I want to point out some more signs that this should be closed as not a real question. Your answer was great considering the severe lack of information, but even at that, the first thing the asker tells you is basically "Sorry, this doesn't answer my extremely vague, unclear question". You gave Firebug as an answer, and explained how to use it, but then the asker tells you he's already using Firebug, and that it won't help.

This is information that, had it been included in the question, would have helped make it a slightly better question. It would still be a list question and subject to closure, but that list would be potentially a lot shorter with a somewhat clearer scope.

The best advice I can offer is to learn to recognize these types of questions, leave guiding comments for users who ask these types of questions, downvote them, and vote to close. In other words, don't waste your valuable time on them. Good luck! :)

Improve this answer
3
  • Technically, we tend to close down shopping list questions as "Not Constructive" but in the end, does it really matter which close reason (between these two, for this type of question) it is?
    – casperOne
    Jul 3, 2012 at 11:37
  • 5
    this could almost be a canonical answer.
    – Andrew Barber
    Jul 3, 2012 at 13:22
  • @casperOne - Depends on how low quality it is. If it was an honest mistake by a noob who seems willing to learn, I'd opt for not constructive. If the op is being an ass or habitually posts low quality material, or should know better, then I'd use NARQ for the extra downvote.
    – jmort253
    Jul 3, 2012 at 14:26
12

The other answers have given you a pretty good rationale for why the deletion happened. So here's some advice if you'd like to avoid this sort of drama in the future:

When you take the time to write a good answer to a poor question, take a minute to edit the question.

The benefits of this are many:

  • A good-looking question is less likely to be closed.
  • A good-looking question, particularly one with a good title, is more likely to draw folks in. Who'll then read your answer.
  • That second edit stands a chance of bumping the question to the front page again. If you space it out a bit, you get even more views...
  • You get the satisfaction and pride of a job well-done.
  • Editor groupies.
Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    The problem is the editor groupies keep saying we don't need no stinking badges.
    – Tim Post
    Jul 4, 2012 at 1:58

You must log in to answer this question.

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