If you add a link of a jsFiddle without adding code to a reply, it gives you a prompt to also add code. This code is either a complete block of code or inline code. But in the case of a question, a proper block of code is required to understand the situation. As in this question, it contains a jsFiddle link, but the inline code is completely irrelevant to the original issue.

So prompting complete code in case of inline code for a question will be quite helpful for the solving issue and for future visitors as well.

  • 1
    There is inline code, see here. Jan 12, 2014 at 9:52
  • 1
    then it should change as above question does not contain any useful inline code and the issue was completely different from what he included. Jan 12, 2014 at 10:48
  • Nice find, @Shadow. For answers I agree it's sometimes okay to just have a bit of inline code (though even then one could probably change that to a code block). But I wonder if for questions we should need more code (either longer inline snippets, or a true code block).
    – Arjan
    Jan 12, 2014 at 10:48
  • Zaheer, the quality filter can't know if inline code is useful or not. Either the feature is turned on, or off. Feel free to start new feature request asking to abort the linked request, see what others think. /cc @Arjan Jan 12, 2014 at 12:02
  • Indeed, @Shadow is right. But as nobody answered this yet, maybe you can change this one into a feature request?
    – Arjan
    Jan 12, 2014 at 12:05
  • @Arjan well, it means total rewrite of this question... up to Mr. Ahmed here. :) Jan 12, 2014 at 12:59
  • 1
    @Arjan yes, but I fear it's not very clear. Oh well... Jan 12, 2014 at 15:56
  • @ShadowWizard yeah I agree too :( Jan 12, 2014 at 15:56
  • and the only answer is the prove Jan 12, 2014 at 15:57
  • Actually I think the answer answers the feature request I thought you wanted...?
    – Arjan
    Jan 12, 2014 at 16:22

1 Answer 1


The auto detector can't tell if the code is relevant or not. Certainly being inline vs being a code block is not a valid heuristic for being relevant. Humans can still vote to close posts, and those that rely on a fiddle should get put on hold until the author provides relevant code in the question.

If we start to put more and more into the auto detector people start to actively work around it. It's best when it catches common mistakes and forgetfulness: it protects against Murphy, not Machiavelli. When you see a bad question, comment, downvote, vote to close or all three. That will make that question better and later questions, written perhaps by people who read this one, may also become better.

  • Actually I would have thought the SE system could easily scrape the linked to JSFiddle to see if the JS matches :) Jan 12, 2014 at 20:57

You must log in to answer this question.

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