I think they should be deleted, because:

  • They are old meta posts. Meta posts are not contributed to human knowledge, they are created to help manage the site.
  • They are for abandoned features. If a feature is now abandoned, it means that it used to be used, and be hated by the mass of users.
  • And because they used to be a hot topic, they attracted a lot of traffic. This will lead to a high rank but unrelated result when you google

For example, when googling prevent share pop up, what second ranked result do you expect?

image description

From FAQ about delete:

Deleted posts are usually not physically deleted (that is, removed from the system); they're just hidden (AKA soft-deleted). This means they won't appear in search results or data dumps, and normal users following links to them will see a 404 (not found) page.

  • 1
    It's just not worth the effort to try to find all of these questions and delete them. If they just disappeared it'd probably be nice, but it would be very time consuming to go and find all of these questions and get rid of them.
    – Servy
    Jun 2, 2015 at 15:19
  • it's not about finding all of them. It's just when the mod or someone has enough rep to delete it, and get into it, they can delete it without any skeptic
    – Ooker
    Jun 2, 2015 at 15:29
  • The best way to start them on the path to deletion is to get them closed as "The problem described here can no longer be reproduced." It know some of these aren't problems per-say since they are talking about feature requests, but it is the most applicable. Once they get closed, then it is a lot easier for people with the appropriate delete privileges to find them. Jun 2, 2015 at 15:57
  • You've clearly visited the site before. Google knows this. Could that've contributed to the rank that it placed on your search?
    – Zizouz212
    Jun 2, 2015 at 16:18
  • no, when I captured the screenshot I just came in and out quickly. They are new to me.
    – Ooker
    Jun 2, 2015 at 16:22
  • 3
    This is the second time today I've seen something suggesting that SE's SEO is too good. I think the solution is to clearly stop being awesome at SEO :)
    – enderland
    Jun 2, 2015 at 17:16
  • @enderland I think it's partly because I go to SE everyday. I'm not sure if they SEO good or not, but I'm quite sure the content is brilliant :D
    – Ooker
    Jun 2, 2015 at 17:22
  • 1
    Here was one solution: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/60729/archive-questions Jun 2, 2015 at 18:51
  • 2
    Even though you didn't visit that particular page, you visited Stack Exchange a lot. This is enough for Google to favor results from a domain you frequent.
    – user259867
    Jun 3, 2015 at 1:15
  • @LanceRoberts I think that's what I propose for.
    – Ooker
    Jun 3, 2015 at 4:34

3 Answers 3


Would the request not being "abandoned" make it any more relevant to your search query?

I don't think it's up to us to monitor what we post, how, or where to carefully craft Google responses to every possible query out there.


I don't think they should be deleted. Here is why:

First off, they shouldn't be deleted, but closed. You never know, someone might need to use this as a reference in the future. There are various close reasons for this, including too localized. As you state, this is the close reason for questions that are only applicable to a certain timeframe.

Here's my second reason:

I can't help but notice the purple coloured link to the post. It looks quite clear that you have visited this before. Google knows this, and understands this, and hence places it higher on the list of search results. When I search the exact keywords, I get a different order and different list of results.

  • As I said in a comment, I take the picture after I went to see the link and return back again. When I google the keyword for the first time, it is the second ranked result already. Google has a lot of factors to rank a result.
    – Ooker
    Jun 2, 2015 at 16:36

Nowadays, on Meta Stack Exchange, the following off-topic close reason is applicable:

The problem described here can no longer be reproduced. Changes to the system or to the circumstances affecting the asker have rendered it obsolete. If you encounter a similar problem, please post a new question.

(emphasis mine)

There's no need to go on a witch hunt for these questions, but if you do encounter one, feel free to flag or vote to close it. (A precedent for this is Documentation.) The Close Votes review queue is quite short here, a few more questions won't bother us.

  • 1
    That should probably be a standard reason on all per-site Meta sites, too.
    – ale
    May 24, 2018 at 14:22
  • /agree. It already is on Meta Stack Overflow. (I haven't added it to Ask Different Meta because this hasn't come up in my 6-8 months of moderating the site.)
    – Glorfindel Mod
    May 24, 2018 at 14:23
  • Web Apps, too. Maybe they already did that.
    – ale
    May 24, 2018 at 14:25
  • No longer be reproduced is a good off-topic reason?
    – Ooker
    May 25, 2018 at 6:35

You must log in to answer this question.

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