Yesterday, I asked the question Will the pluralization issue in number of bookmarks on list of bountied questions in user profile page be fixed at some point?, which in its original revision reported a bug. That bug was already reported in an answer to the announcement New responsive Activity page, and had been marked as by a staff member, so as such my question (correctly) got marked as a duplicate.

Having noticed the answer and seeing that the prior report had been tagged as planned more than two months ago, I edited my question into a different one, asking for its current status and expressing concern that it ended up falling off staff's radar (especially since the marking was right before the holiday code freeze). As it's an entirely different question, and no longer simply reports the same issue as in the answer, I believe the edited question should be reopened.

However, reopen reviewers still deemed that my question was a duplicate. Additionally, the edited question got a significantly worse reception from voters than the original question.

What can I do to improve the question so it's of higher quality?

Also, what can I do to have it reopened since it's no longer a duplicate? Can the reviewers please explain why they believe the question is still a duplicate, even though it's no longer simply reporting the same issue?

(The reviewers chose explicitly that the question was a duplicate, not simply that the original close reason wasn't resolved or some other close reason, which means they believe my edited question is still a duplicate.)

To be clear, the edited question has a different goal from the original question. It's asking about why a report marked as planned still hasn't been fixed, and asks if it's still on the team's radar or if it ended up falling through the cracks, which may have happened since the winter holiday was right after the marking. Had the answer been marked as deferred or even not received an official response, I would have simply not edited the question and agreed that it was a duplicate.

Update: I removed all parts of the question asking for the original report to be fixed, and made it solely focus on the report's current position in the queue. I understand that that may have an implicit undertone of "please fix this", but that's not what I'm asking: I just want to know the current plan to fix it. "We plan on fixing this 10 years from now" is a perfectly valid answer to the question. I made the edit and requested a re-review, but reviewers still unanimously rejected the request as "original close reason wasn't resolved": I'd like to know why, and what exact edit is needed to resolve it and make my question unique.

  • 1
    Most maybe, but not all the reviewers. Commented Feb 26, 2022 at 19:38
  • 4
    Everyone can't simply wait a couple of months and then reask about something that is of the most minor importance; this site isn't here to teach English, people shouldn't be taking everything written as examples of perfect grammar and spelling. --- Almost everything else might get fixed prior to this.
    – Rob
    Commented Feb 27, 2022 at 11:06
  • 2
    I notice that you don't complain about this being left open. Is that how it works? If it's closed they are wrong, if it's left open they are correct. --- You can see how the reasons for posting, and the reasons for leaving open, are different. If not, there's something to study.
    – Rob
    Commented Feb 27, 2022 at 11:12
  • @Rob In the above case, there was a gap of 2.5 months between the announcement and the answer. The team only watches announcements for answers for 3-4 weeks after posting them, then further reports should be posted as new questions. That's why it was left open. Commented Feb 27, 2022 at 15:50
  • @Rob With regard to reporting trivial issues: the team prefers that such issues be reported, because they're super easy and trivial to fix. Commented Feb 27, 2022 at 15:56
  • 2
    1st comment reply, yes that's why it was allowed. 2nd comment reply, that is thoroughly addressed in my first two comments; and your specific concern has been addressed, both by my comment above, the votes, and a moderator's comment - wait patiently.
    – Rob
    Commented Feb 27, 2022 at 16:04
  • @Mari-LouA The request in question has an official response (in the feedback answer), while that post of mine asks how to get attention for requests with no official response. Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:13
  • 6
    So why doesn't the official response satisfy you? Why is this trivial bug more important than ones that are objectively more substantial? You posted a question asking how to reopen a previous question about a bug, which had no official response. It got closed as a duplicate. It looks like you want to draw attention to this problem. The older question, which you are the author of, has many suggestions on how to do that. Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:17
  • @Mari-LouA It seems you're not digging deep enough into the chain. The question this question asks about is not reporting the bug, but is asking about the progress of an already-reported bug reported as a feedback answer to an announcement. That answer has an official response that it's planned (intended to be fixed in the near term). The question this is asking about asks why it hasn't been fixed despite the response 2.5 months prior. Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:20
  • The question this asks about expresses concern that a certain bug report that was marked as planned ended up falling through for whatever reason, regardless of its triviality. If it had been marked as deferred, I would have taken no action. If it had no official response, I would have followed my own advice you linked to. Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:24
  • 4
    You have an official answer. Have all the bugs reported been fixed, but only this one left behind? Then you can make a stronger case. Why not count the number of unfixed bugs and include them in this post? Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:25
  • 5
    Does this answer your question? Can we have a guaranteed pipeline for responses from Stack Exchange?
    – Rob
    Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:36
  • 2
    @Sonic, that was done with a hammer ten minutes later, with no intervening comments or edits. --- Do you prefer this closed as: "This question does not appear to seek input and discussion from the community." --- If it's so critical that's the duplicate.
    – Rob
    Commented Feb 28, 2022 at 12:49
  • 3
    There are bug reports with status planned for years, think there's one having that tag for 8 years. It is meaningless. I learned it the hard way, you're still in the process of learning, but you'll reach the same conclusion, one day: status tags of review, planned, and deferred have no real meaning. They're all one and same: SE team has no idea if, and when, the bug/request will be done. They might say it will be done "soon", but it's just words. My personal experience proved beyond any doubt that in too many cases, there are just no actions behind those words. Commented Mar 6, 2022 at 12:10

1 Answer 1


How can I improve my question asking about when an answer to an announcement marked as planned will be implemented, and have it reopened?

Nothing. You can't do anything to rush SE staff and make them focus their efforts on fixing the bug you reported.

I'm afraid it's simple as that.

  • So you're suggesting that I remove the sentence at the end of it asking that the original bug be fixed, so it solely focuses on its current position in the company's internal tracker? That question isn't trying to rush the implementation, but just trying to determine its current placement on the work timeline and whether it was lost due to the holiday period immediately after. "We didn't lose track of it, we just don't plan on fixing it until ten years from now" is a perfectly valid answer to my question. Would that edit make that clearer? Commented Mar 6, 2022 at 19:42
  • With that edit, it would definitely not be a duplicate of the original report. Also, appearing to rush the team is apparently why it's considered a low-quality question for the site, so hopefully making clear I'm not doing that would increase the quality of the question. Commented Mar 6, 2022 at 19:43
  • 1
    @Sonic I don't suggest anything, I just give my opinion, based on personal experience. And asking someone "Are we there yet?" "Are we there yet?" or "When will we arrive?" is rushing, it's indirect but obvious. It's same as "Come on, go faster, I want to arrive!" just different wording. And like I said in the answer, nothing you will write will make SE staff reply, they choose to reply to very few selected bugs, and that's it, which makes sense as they don't have many people. As for duplicate closure it's different matter, and yes edits can help reopen such questions. Commented Mar 7, 2022 at 8:05
  • 1
    Would you agree to reopen the question if I make that edit? Yeah, I agree that the sentence I'm talking of removing does subjectively come across as rushing: when I ask such a question though, I'm talking objectively, meaning I'm imagining asking that question to my Google Maps GPS, which will respond with an actual number of minutes. SE can take however long they want to answer the question; I just want to improve the question into a state where it's of higher quality and not a duplicate. Commented Mar 7, 2022 at 8:33
  • @Sonic I can't promise anything, sorry. Make the edit, ping me, I'll go over the question, and if I'll be certain enough it's not duplicate, I'll reopen. Again, can't promise before I take a thorough look. Commented Mar 7, 2022 at 8:36
  • 1
    @Sonic one more thing, I have the feeling you feel bad about the downvotes because they imply low quality. So please don't. They don't imply low quality, they imply people who disagree with the way you say things. I disagree with the part of rushing staff, for example. But yet I consider your question to be high quality, like all your posts. So no need to feel bad or that it's low quality. Commented Mar 7, 2022 at 8:38
  • Yep, removed the text. For the full picture, see the full history of the question: in revision 2, I added a paragraph clearly mentioning the original report and explaining how that question is different. Commented Mar 7, 2022 at 9:27

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