This question Good books to understand the basics of material science Was marked as duplicate and redirected to Best Materials Science Introduction Book? The thing is, the second question was particularly about Neutron scattering.But in the first question, I asked for an introductory undergrad text like the book by Van Vlack(Fortunately someone answered my question).Clearly, Neutron scattering seems to be advanced(at least for me).Does this mean, this site is only for researchers and scientists? While voting a question as duplicate, do people read the content of the question or just compare the titles?. I even flagged the question, explaining that it is not a duplicate.But, I got no response.(In particular, I think "Chair" was one of the persons who voted it duplicate.I am not accusing him.But would like an explanation from him.)
Apparently I'm one of the people who voted to close this, so I can easily give my opinion on this situation.
His question specifically was:
"What would you suggest as a good introduction to materials science?"
While yours stated:
"suggest me some good books(introductory level) to understand the basics of material science."
These two questions are identical besides formatting.
There is a note added which says:
"Prior usage and examples would be wonderful, my particular focus is neutron scattering"
but that doesn't really change the base of their question. The question is still about a good introductory book for material science. They didn't even really say the books had to discuss those topics at all. They were just showing what their interests/focuses were.
You can also see this good related answer on a very similar topic which gives a good rundown of some reasons why such questions would be closed as duplicates, even in less obvious situations.
I didn't have vote-to-close privileges at the time, so I have no idea how you knew that I had flagged it as a duplicate (maybe the auto-generated comment has been deleted?)
Anyways, I think that the older question was about as general as yours: the author clearly specified "introductory", which is similar enough to your usage of the term "basic". Furthermore, the mention of neutron scattering was in brackets, so I very strongly believe that the author was adding that as a plus-point, not as a main focus.
I had checked on the answers of the older question, and neither of them seemed to focus particularly on the concept of neutron scattering: they both included more general stuff. There is only one title recommended because of its focus on neutron scattering. A question explicitly about neutron scattering probably wouldn't merit a resource reccomendation tag in the first place (in my opinion): my experience with resource recommendations is that they're really, really broad.
That being said, if you're still extremely sure that none of those books are applicable, you can edit your question to mention that you have read the other thread and you have found that those books are to advanced, despite the title of that post.
Looking at your comments under JMac's answer, I think that you're particularly bothered by the fact that you didn't get a response when you claimed that it isn't a duplicate in a flag. Did you check your flagging history? Near the top-right corner of your profile page, there's a line saying "$x$ helpful flags". If you click that, you'll be able to see the status of your flags. Odds are the moderator who reviewed it (presumably you used a custom flag to describe the situation) left a reply. Alternatively, you could have tagged me with "@Chair" in another comment to discuss the situation. But we're discussing it here, so hopefully that aspect's resolved.
I haven't seen what an asker is shown when someone flags their post as a duplicate for myself, but from what I've read on Meta Stack Exchange, you'll be shown a yellow banner saying something like "your question may already have an answer here. If the answers there do not address your difficulty, please edit your question to provide more details", with a link to the suggested duplicate, before your question is actually closed. I suggest that you could have concatenated something on the lines of
I've read the post Best Materials Science Introduction Book? but I believe that the focus there is upon neutron scattering and the recommended books are hence too advanced.
...to your question. It would show favorably that you've done a significant amount of prior research by looking at physics SE posts and attempting their solutions, and it would also give readers a clearer idea of the level you're looking for.
It does not help at all that you chose to vandalize your own post. And for no apparent reason, you made an edit to remove the word 'please". Twice.