There are certain types of questions which are being asked on a regular basis, should be put on hold and don't fit properly within any of the existing reasons for putting a question on hold.
All the situations below these lines can be fitted within a wide interpretation of some of the current on-hold categories. But why bringing restricted definitions to their pure limits, instead of extending them as much as required? It has to be borne in mind that the whole point of the reasons to put a question on hold is to help the OP understand what needs to be changed.
The main types of questions/behaviours which I think that should be accounted for are:
- Questions consisting of plain requests to write a piece of code by merely providing the inputs/outputs (or the original code in case of migrations).
- Questions with a more or less big code (which the asker is clearly not even understanding), no description and a generic request (e.g., why doesn't it work?).
- Spam or sets of random words.
- Question written so badly that it is impossible to understand what is being asked.
- Questions written in a language different than English.
- Very basic questions implying that the asker doesn't have a minimum understanding about the given language (or even about programming in general).
- Questions which are too abstract or unprecise.
- Questions which can easily be answered after a 1-min. online research.
- Questions complaining about errors which are not properly defined (e.g., error message and code line where it happens) or which occur in parts of the code not being shown in the description.